I agree, we'll have to live with that. And I fixed the scenarios which I like myself. For example the first Donner Pass run. Cloned it, removed the timing clocks, and swapped the GP9s for the excellent must-have SP GP20s from Reppo. https://store.steampowered.com/app/222571/Train_Simulator_Southern_Pacific_GP20_Loco_AddOn/
And herein lies the argument. Is there a profit to SCS for modifying the UK map? In the short term, no. But people will go back and play the original map, and drive jobs to and from it, and some will just explore the old map. MAking changes allows people to have new and enhanced gameplay. Similarly, people can still make scenarios on a modified map is TS. They might be able to make better scenarios. More importantly, the scenarios included with the route might work and people can complete all included scenarios should they choose to do so nefore venturing into custom content. There is still a benefit to the player. And if the player benefits, they may continue to buy content. So in both cases, playing the short game may show no profit, but playing the long game there is a good chance they will buy more. And when you have $13,000 of downloadable content, you want to keep your customers. SCS has much less DLC to work with and they change older content to improve it. DTG doesn't. Someone playing a broken map as the first map won't be back. That's losing the long game. DTG needs to play the long game. SCS meanwhile is winning the long game in their own simuators and releasing DLC only when it's ready, not rushing out things that are broken. SCS's method is the way to do it for happy customers. Rushing out broken things just makes you look incompetent.
I agree with Cyclone here. People like to return to old routes every now and then, and simply changing scenario timetables is most usually trivial. I do that all the time as between default physics and 75%, they're a hit and miss. Donner scenarios are trivial due to double track, the player doesn't conflict with AI. As this is the only SP route available (unless you count Cajon, which is subjective and region locked), with tons of DLC, it's generally attractive. I'd also appreciate a scenery bump, but it's still good enough. People used to write off the game (weak review score) because they normally experience factory stuff first. As a veteran it's nigh impossible to understand, with a broader perspective, lesser care (realism vs racing) and 3rd party options. I remember my struggles during the first year with all these issues. Poor Chicken Balti. I still believe (not just think) that the TS team is teeny-tiny and hence they can't put in the effort, all the while being afraid of messing up like that NS Coal District scenario where you have to nag a moved loco. They have some, just very little.
Of course I agree with Cyclone. But reality is that you'll wait forever for a scenario fix. That's just how it is, not good, but it's not worth bothering in my opinion as it won't get us anywhere especially concerning such old content. Why not put the effort in firing up the editor and adjusting scenarios to your needs or upload to the workshop?
I'm surprised that the people on RailWorks America have not does some mods the way the German simmers do.
The point is that the fixes take five minutes. They would have an update out in an hour. But they insist on any changes going through a two week phase to ensure everything in there still works properly. The thing is, you're only editing a scenario file. Play the scenario. Did you complete it successfully? Good, it's likely safe to release the update. Such a simple fix and it's not something they feel compelled to fix even though it defines good customer service.
So what is stopping you editing the scenario and why do you have to wait for DTG to fix it? If I had a route with a faulty scenario and it was something I could fix I would clone it and fix it myself.
What is stopping you from buying a car that doesn't work, and why do you refuse it instead of burying yourself in the wires and engine work? What is stopping you to accept a car that emits a black trail of smoke and shakes like a badly loaded wash mashine? Because we expect a product to work and up to certain quality standards. SCS is showing that a better standard is achievable and people are happy with a smaller but better game.
Strange how some people will download a Freeware route or scenario and than change something to solve a problem but won't do the same on a payware route? I had a problem on MML where the Speed board gizmo was in the wrong place so the speed showed higher than it should be. There was no warning of a speed change in the HUD on on the track I could have waited until DTG fixed it but I did it myself
Nothing is stopping anyone from buying a car that doesn't work, but most people who are doing that are going into it with the knowledge that there may be issues that need to be fixed. When you buy a used car, the best advice anyone can give you is to have it inspected for things you might have to fix. If you are a wrencher, then maybe that is part of the fun. But when you buy a new car, you do not expect to have to fix anything (at least right away) and I am pretty sure that you will be bringing it to the dealer if anything goes wrong or is broken. The same goes for buying a TS route or DLC. A buyer should have some level of confidence that what they are buying doesn't have major bugs (or if it does the bugs will be fixed in a timely manner). I am not talking about minor issues like milepost 63 was missed, or the occasional floating tree/rock/etc. I'm talking about scenarios that don't complete properly, or something major like the bridge on the Clinchfield where the tracks take you through a large concrete support. These level of bugs make you say to yourself, "How did they miss that?" Having said that, be thankful for Steam reviews and forums, where these kind of issues can be highlighted and discussed. That way those who can fix the issue can happily buy the DLC, modify it, and enjoy. Those who find it too daunting can simply avoid the DLC if it is rated too poorly.
You would be surprised (or might not be) how much some get hung up on the Gold Star/1000pts of Career Scenarios. When you edit scenarios to fix most problems you inevitably have to convert to Standard which only gives the lowly checkmark This shouldn't affect the enjoyment level of a scenario, but it seems to. I often re-play the same scenario several times just because I like it. The game doesn't give me a reward for playing it again with "1000pts", but I don't care. I still think the expectation for a payware route/scenario is -- and should be -- that it devoid of major bugs, and if one is discovered that it is fixed.
You might be surprised to learn that official scenarios cannot be edited, leaving unachievable content on our menu without an option. Freeware content, and even payware content outside of Steam, can be edited and thus we do not have the gap of unachievable content in the menu. Context is important here. We're expected to work around unachievable content to make it achievable in a separate listing. Just make the damn content work in the first place. A lot of it I think is DTG not even knowing about the problems. Because core updates broke things that have not been reported to them yet. I took two videos and sent them to someone yesterday. This is the kind of thing that may get work done on the older content. Unfortunately, the customer service portal seems to not give a damn. That needs to change. It's a bad attitude to have. I could offer better customer service on a hairdryer and I don't even use one. By the way, WCML South has a scenario whose Scenario.bin and ScenarioProperties don't match up. One has 12 services. The other has 16 services. I'm immensely curious, and will find out soon, as to whether this causes problems with the scenario. This is in the CURRENT VERSION. And may or may not be fixed.
I'm not so sure all the bugs in routes/scenarios are from Core Updates. Maybe Donner Pass (which is a really old route - 2012) is an example of bugs creeping in over time and multiple updates. However, I will use a specific example: the Granger Heartland: Kansas City – Topeka Route to show the other bugs that are just getting ignored in on some routes. Granger Heartland is not an old route either, it came out in Oct 2019. To be clear, I enjoy the route for the most part -- scenery is great and it is a low tile lag route...but... Exhibit A: - a 67 miles route with no whistle boards, no speed signs, and some sudden unexpected speed changes that don't match the HUD. Anyone who has played TS20xx (at least NA routes) would notice this issue with a single drive. The only explanation for it's release this way is it was behind schedule -- so ship it anyway. A tester couldn't help but notice the missing signage. This was a decision by someone that it was "good enough". Exhibit B: - Scenario 4 fails to log a task. What should be an easy marshalling scenario fails because a coupling step isn’t recognized. Why you may ask? The car numbers in the consist that you are supposed to couple to don't match the scenario description!!! Anyone who was play testing should notice this and flag it to be fixed before release. This was a decision by someone that it was "Oh Well -- good enough". Exhibit C: - Scenario 7 does not complete properly. It's actually a good run, no issues, but the scoring is broken. Upon completion you get 0pts and no checkmark. No checkmark is the bigger issue if you use the scenario page to keep track of what runs you have completed. I haven't had a deeper look at this one yet, but again you can't miss this bug. Someone decided it didn't matter and was "good enough". These kinds of bugs make me assume that either the playtesters/QC don't have enough influence in the process, don't have any time to actually run the scenarios, or don't really take it that seriously. Or maybe route designers aren't allowed to touch things after their allocated time is used up? Or maybe the update procedure is too time consuming/cumbersome? Or maybe...??? Don't get me wrong. I love playing TS20xx and won't stop buying DLC that I want despite the above comments. And perhaps, that is the real problem...they know that.
I do know that official scenarios cannot be edited but they can be Cloned. So you have a scenario that does not work and you're not going to get any points. Clone the scenario, make it a Standard Scenario then edit it to remove the problem You won't get any points but you will have the satisfaction of completing it Or, for those who have had Donner Pass since it was released, continue to sit on your hands waiting for a Fix from DTG.
Chances are the train physics change means DP scenarios might have worked before with no problems climbing the hill. The reason for my thinking there is that the Monumental 1 (NS Coal District) scenario has an actual video from TS 2014 of the long train easily climbing a hill; it cannot do it today. Climbing at 100% throttle led to reduction to nearly half speed and eventually wheelslip. So DTG literally is breaking their own scenarios. Amazing they made changes to break it and won't fix what they broke now. It's not that I can't make a fixed version, it's that DTG ought to make one. And given I just recorded a run on Donner 22 minutes late...no, I'm thinking that one didn't work, that was the passenger service that CAN climb the hills.
I think we are talking about two different things, without hearing each other. If you can fix something, it's best to learn how to fix it, and do it instead of being entirely dependent on others. One expects a faultless product for their money. Unless the faults are clearly known. Applies to used products, by the way. One expects a digital product to be maintained to remain faultless, or become less faulty, to keep meeting expectations. Both are true. One doesn't override the other.
Yes, I agree but in 10 years they have not done anything yet so I don't expect anything to happen. Which gives you the choice of fixing it or ignoring it.
Oh, I hear the other point all right. Heck, I've had to do it to be able to properly video a run. The point is, when we're here showing what's wrong and fixing it, DTG should in turn be applying similar fixes on their end so that people play their stuff, not ours. Otherwise people are thanking us for the clean and excellent run when all we did was change out some cars, remove a problem train, or fix the timings.
I have fixed most of my issues myself, as I am the curious type who wants to know how things work. It can be annoying to wait for official fixes for TS. It is the complete opposite with the german Zusi3 simulator. The developer is active in the forum and responds to every bug report, and fixes are out in a short amount of time. The way they are going is slowly come out with new routes and rolling stock (which are free of cost once you purchased the game) and concentrate on fixing every bug they find, as the sim is used for real engineer training, and TS is of course a good money making machine. A very addictive one. So go out and play the hundreds of great workshop scenarios on Donner Pass Redux. Everything is there. I think TS is most problematic for new players who expect a perfect out-of-the-box experience, and I see that they get frustrated very quickly. Obviously the older loyal players add the biggest part to DTG's revenues. And to be honest I'd not go for a refund say for Tehachapi pass and the catastrophic brakes, simply because I mainly bought it for the route and know hot to edit things. Now I'm looking for a lua uncompiler to fix those brake scripts...
Well, Donner Pass - is there a physics fix for old DLC? Specifically the Cab Forward, but from vague memories, at least the SD45 was the same. Brakes on those wagons are excessively powerful. With the CF you reduce brakes from 90.0 to 89.8 PSI and it's too much for the 2.4% grade. On top of the very elastic couplers and the resulting yo-yo effect. Attaching any of these wagons to an engine with a minimum application of 84.0 PSI must be funny. Objectives normally fail as one half of the consist moves quite a bit (5 mph even, usually backwards) while the other half of it is stationary. I was observing the coupler yoyo and it was most definitely odd, as if effort applies up to a very high ceiling with the caboose getting there first.
I know that there's a physics tweak for the Cab Forward locomotive I obtained it via watching the guy's youtube video there was a link. It means that one can refill the water tank and refuel the tender, assuming the route does have appropriate fuelling and watering facilities, and also has changes to capacities and other physics parameters.
