First of all, I warn that I'm going to ask from humility, because I have no idea about programming, videogame development or anything like that. It's just a doubt that arises to someone with total ignorance, who most likely thinks (wrongly) that things are easier than they seem. And excuse me if I go on too long. Well, after the preamble, I will say that I own Dresden-Riesa and Dresden-Chemnitz, and I like them both very much. I love them. But when I arrive at Dresden Hbf from Chemnitz, finish the service, continue with free roam mode and see how those BR 101, those ICE or those services to beautiful Meissen arrive, all run by AI... man, it makes me tremendously sad not to be able to get on one and get behind the controls. I think: wow imagine now going to Riesa with a quick trip in that IC at 160 km/h, and on arrival doing a service with the 363 going back and forth to the chemical plant. And then I go back to Dresden in a heavy goods train, and when I get there I take over a BR 612. What a wonder, what a variety! Yes, some people will tell me: jump off the route and get on the other one. But it's not the same, I don't know if you agree with me. These routes are set in different years, but let's imagine for a moment that this is not the case. Let's ignore for a moment also the hardware limitations. So, my question is: Since all the IA traffic is already implemented in the timetable, is it THAT complicated to just copy one route and paste it next to the other? I mean, all the trains are already there, and they go along a little bit of the other route to a portal. It would make a big difference if instead of that little bit there was the whole of the other route, and turn those AI services into playable services? To a layman like me, it might seem like the hardest part is already done. All the traffic is there. The two routes are there, you just have to link them together, right? So, I would like to be able to understand where the difficulty that DTG always tells us exists in achieving this.
iirc there's a software limitation as well in that the 2 routes would need combining into a new combined file and redownloading from DTG (who would have to have made the combined route file first).
There is a giant thread about route merging with really interesting opinions. I also think tsw needs that in the future at least in some trial. Not every route has to be developed to make merges / extensions, but to have not a single one is a bit shameful with dtgs current strategy "we do not extend, we do not merge". Its not easy for sure. One main problem starts with the timetable the route is set. Riesa dresden has a pretty modern time table, while dresden chemnitz is set 10 years ago. Also it doesnt work if a route uses real world timetables, and the connected route has a fantasy timetable. For a realistc approach i could immagine a gwe extension to oxford, a eastcoastway extension to hastings or a 2 part route dlc, made from begin to either own separate or merged to a combined route for people own both. Time will tell, i really hope dtg is not gonna ignore the 200 votes
Well, i fear that the problem is not that they dont want to do it, more than the technichal difficulties and time needed to do so are a no go. Still i vote for Hastings extension !
Id settle for an ingame portal (whether that would be a loco's cab or area on a platform) which automatically exits one route and puts you straight in to the next route at the same month, time and weather conditions. This is already possibility at a number of stations on UK and German routes.
https://forums.dovetailgames.com/threads/route-mergers-in-2022-let’s-build-a-network….50511/ erg73 more here
I think what will make it difficult is the limitations of the platforms. Already PS5 is coming across a limit of 64GB of DLC and with that making sure the route is loaded for an extension isn’t necessarily easy. Route mergers are technically challenging because of getting the timetables to work and making sure there isn’t any major bugs. In the interim it’s possible to ensure the timetables are “in sync” with the adjacent one but it would only enable the mergers but the development time and complexity is going to be a key factor. Already Gen 8 consoles are struggling to cope with the same level as PC/Gen 9 so I think it’ll be avoided for the time being. It doesn’t stop them trying though if they have a bit of spare time but don’t hold your breath for it really seriously happening until it appears on the roadmap.
The issue isn't one of technically getting this to work. The routes are formed of tiles, so stringing from one tile to another works the same whether its all in one DLC or not, and let's face it when you start a service (by taking control of the service) the game could automatically load the "other DLC" in the background so long as the station tiles are the same (or at least in the same geolocation within the game files) So then you talk about timetables. I don't know how they work in TSW but given they have to program each service almost individually, with copying and offsetting as "speeding up tools" I imagine that a copy/paste would only work AFTER you've already spent the time creating the things in the first place, and then you have to deal with duplications, collisions etc Lastly you have the issue of extentions to services. OK so you can hop off one service and get on another and technically they're seperate services "in game" so achievements, medals, scores etc are all fine. But what if it's the same service? So a freight comes in on one line, goes through (or past) the station then continues onto another DLC... How does that work. If you run the whole thing do you get both medals? If you have a gold medal for part one, but then fail it in the merge what happens then...? All of that needs working out before they can look to do mergers or extension of routes. The best option they have right now is "shared station tiles using portals to move between DLC", so the same as the blue light glows they have at the moment, but they take you to services in other DLC sharing the same platforms. This would mean going back and putting those portals in though, so no small amount of work Overall, no matter what they do there ARE ways of doing it that would and could work, but all would take time to develop, all of them would take pres. crew time to retrofit to existing routes and in the end the "additional experience" could be minimal so it's a case of "how many people is this worth it to?" I'm sure many would like to walk off a Southbound service from Victoria at Brighton and onto a Coastway service to Eastbourne, but I'm also sure people would like working TPWS, German display systems, PIS on vintage routes etc etc and they all take time
Thank you for your extensive publication. Everything you say is very interesting and the message I understand is that everything is much more difficult and complex than it may seem at first glance when it comes to route mergers. To be honest, I am a bit sad after reading you because I sense that the day is a long way off when this will become a reality, if that day ever comes. Because I have the following thought: Merging routes would be a clear advantage for the customer and would add a plus to the game but where is DTG's profit in all this? If it is going to take a lot of staff hours and resources to carry it out and it is not going to bring practically any additional economic benefit to the company, I can imagine that it will always remain at the bottom of the wish list. A company is there to make money and as much as they are train enthusiasts and would like to implement a lot of things in TSW, in the end it all comes down to a numbers game. Either DTG finds a way to make it profitable or I'm afraid we're going to be waiting a long, long time
Good idea and for RRO RSN these use Hagen Hbf Freight Bypass tracks to access Hagen Gbf where they can be broken down. Another way to do this in selling it as a merged route Bundle. Example is BML & ECW as Coast to City.
My only thought on the matter is it would keep players playing longer term and maybe get them to buy a route similar to the ones they already have if those players believe that longer or more varied services over an extended route or network would bring them back to buy said extensions or joined routes. For new players it may bring slightly less attraction above what they already have
