Who Think That Dtg Should Start Creating Longer Realistic Route, This Year?

Show me a pic and I'll tell you straight.

 

DTG could do a compromise with players wanting longer routes with say scenario's but done in an immersive way for instance The scenario would say go on this route at a certain time then when that route is over you have to travel as a passenger to another route to then complete that and so forth. imo it would flush out the game more and could lead to a decent career mode but done in a realistic way.

 

Several thoughts regarding the opinions expressed in this thread so far:

1. How long does a real-life engine driving shift last, in terms of minimums and maximums for passenger, through freight, and switching/shunting runs?

2. How much would a longer route, with more scenery, structure, and track assets effect load-in times and fps rates (two factors that many folks complain about even on routes of the average current length?

3. How many folks would be willing to pay for the additional development work involved in making a longer route?

BTW: I didn't vote because in my opinion the issue presented is way too complex for a binary choice.

 

DTG have said in the past making longer routes is not the problem it is making them interesting so I guess the actual Railway Stations themselves would take the most development and I would assume there is a fair amount of people that would pay for a longer route. I would but obviously it would have to be a route I want in the first place.

I'm sure I heard it is 8-12 hrs shifts in the UK but I could be wrong so do not quote me on that. I thought when you approach a piece of scenery it was loaded in and when you past it it was loaded out, I have no idea if that is 100%. One of the biggest problems DTG has is optimisation problems so that would affect the longer routes more.

 

Turns out its a known issue, if you select on the first screen only from the top list its ok, but if you select a division from the bottom list its a bug.

 

1. I believe the rule of thumb is "12 hours on, 12 hours off", a response to the Clapham Junction crash where the engineers were shown to have been working very long hours and therefore missed the dodgy connection which caused the whole thing. As I say it's a "rule of thumb" rather than a hard and fast, but as an example the recent record attempt run from London to Scotland was done in one shot by a single driver, so that's over four hours in one stint...
2. I don't think the issue with FPS and load times relates to how LONG a route is, because the route loads in and out in "tiles", with only a few in memory at any one time. The issue with FPS relates more to "tile density", so how much is compacted onto a single tile, how that's rendered, animated etc etc. As an example one would expect that a cityscape would take longer to load and more memory than a rural setting, simply because of the number of buildings, light sources, shadow sources, noises etc etc. DTG seem to buck this trend by trying to render individual clumps of grass all of which animate, hence rural america taking up so much CPU and GPU power
3. I would say that depends. If "a longer route" was all one route, which a lively timetable, lots of locos and lots to do then maybe they would pay more for it. If it was a group of routes that slotted together ending up at the same thing there would always be people who bought the individual routes, and a number who buy the whole network, but in the end it's the commercial decision of DTG how they play it, and for now they want to make disparate routes and sell them all individually

 

Hmmmmmm: a post I added to this thread yesterday has vanished without a trace.

 

I'm not sure how I feel about a super-long route, but I'd certainly love to see the BML expanded and merged somewhat:

• Get the main branch up to London Bridge, and then bring in Thameslink 700s
• Add the two terminating branches from Purley to Caterham and Tottenham Corner
• Merge in East Coastway, adding in the joining line from Wivelsfield to Lewes.

Those three are a reasonably hefty undertaking, but not too arduous, and would add such a variety to services that I personally believe would be very much worth it.


The so called "god tier" expansion would be the above, and then bring the Chatham Mainline to TSW2 exactly as it is in the recent TS release, including the lines all the way over to Dover Priory and Ramsgate, as well as adding in the HS1 section from Southeastern High Speed. That would give us over 220 miles of track and a huge variety of routes and timetables.

 

Everyone keeps suggesting CML... Given every service on the CML runs fast from Victoria to Bromley South and fast again until Longfield there's a whole heap of services missed from the London travel zones which would be filled by LO and TL services which I would much prefer added to the BML rather than another "hey you miss everything" mainline driving Electrostars

I would much prefer a pack including the London Bridge lines via Dulwich and Sydenham and preferably the line out to Beckenham as well
Throw in the correct class for commuter shuttles and you have a decent South London Southern network

For Thameslink yes it goes from Norwood Junction to London Bridge, but it goes fast. Stops at none of the stations between so a 700 DLC would fit on top of the above (as well as on SEHS and BML) but for me I don't see any standalone route DLC which needs the 700 south of the river. Most notably an MML from St Pancras to Bedford would require the 700 as they're the commuter shuttle for that line, and maybe a North Kent Lines (though the 465 we have would populate this for the main), or even the Peterborough or Cambridge Lines out of KGX

 

For the umpteenth time: route extensions are not going to happen. Not for BML. Not for GWE. Not for LIRR. Not for anything.

 

I noticed a post I made in another thread went 'walkies'. Concerning eh?

 

Good point and for class 700 it can arrive in game as part of Rush Hour Train Pack HSP-46 Acela Boston-Providence Class 700 & 59 Brighton Main Line and Nahverkehr Dresden DB BR146.0 DB BR411/415 ICE-T

 

I sure hope they’ll do the Hsp46 bilevel double decker coach’s for the rush hour route Boston sprinter in the near future.

 

Longer routes = choice. Choice to run the whole thing or just parts of it.
A few people on here have posted, i don't have the time to sit running a route for X amount of time.
Well some of us do have the time and would like the choice to be able to do it.
I don't always want to run Paddington - Penzance in TS1, but at least i can if i wish.
Same for the merged ATS WCML Preston - Glasgow - Edinburgh or ATS ECML Kings X - Edinburgh.
Choice is a wonderful thing. At the moment with DTG we get bits and pieces of routes, which make no sense.
What is the sense of Paddington - Reading, it should have been created to at least Swindon and preferably Bristol.
DTG's philosophy with both games, has always been as little as possible for the most bunce.

 

And that why i say in order for this to work, they have to fix the save game Format.

 

I don't know anything about the save game function buddy.
But getting DTG to fix anything, is like having teeth pulled.

 

Absolutely. Do you want a british route in the game, or wait for the next two years while they make one 7½ times longer than their usual. Oh, and of course you won't have the assets to populate it because so many different type of trains run on the lines in question that even with three or four it will still look barren
Oh and lastly, you'll be paying 7½ times the cost (if not more) to make it viable, so that'll be £180 or near as darnit...
That's the choice you're asking people to make. Not just longer routes, but longer waits, longer numbers on credit cards and not really a better experience all round unless you want something really specific, ie to drive from PNZ to PAD

 

Sheesh, you left out the Orient Express, Paris to Istanbul.

 

I believe it's because the line was built to relatively lightweight standards, so that given the high axle loading of loaded hoppers the speed has to be held down lest the track gets pounded to pieces.

Although US mainlines are generally laid with 32-pound rail, most branch lines aren't.

 

Might also have to do with the frequent rock falls reported along the branch. Engineers have to watch the track carefully and be ready to brake those heavy trains at a moment's notice if they see objects on the r-o-w. Hair raising to say the least.

Now there's an idea for a scenario.

 

Don't forget the Trans-Europe Express. It even comes with its own theme song.

Though now I wonder if that 31-train network could be done piecemeal, as its own "country".

 

There's long and there's long. London to Glasgow or Bristol to Newcastle is never going to happen, but something like the distance of London to Birmingham, Paddington to Bristol or Bristol to Birmingham should certainly be on the possibility horizon. DTG and their route builders have had several years now to become comfortable with the creation tools. I for one am still a bit disappointed that even with Spirit Of Steam they have gone for girth rather than length, when something like the Somerset and Dorset from Bath to Bournemouth or S&C from Skipton to Carlisle would have given us a decent length run to test our coal and water management skills.

 

All things considered I think length is something that'll develop over time, as the route builders grow ever more confident with their tools but more importantly build up a repository of assets and stations that only need to be tweaked or improved to be used again in a new route. At the end of the day, if you already have the station built, you don't have to do it again.

 

Develop over time eh? You have a point but it's been nearly 5 years already. DTG should already have a understanding of the UE4 tools by now. Do they need 50 years to make route extensions or a route from London St Pancras to Dover Priory or route from Brighton to Portsmouth Harbor.

 

They need an infinite number of years to do route extensions, because they are NEVER GOING TO DO THEM. Ever.

 

Removed by DTG Natster - Inappropriate

 

I still remember from an old DTG stream them saying that 'longer routes is not a problem' which makes it sound likely but when they followed it by saying 'the route has to be interesting' made me deflated at the time as that is very subjective.

 

This makes me wonder how fast the Rocky Mountaineer train goes on that line now that it's now operating to and from Moab on the Cane Creek Branch. Is it the usual 10mph over freight, or are they stuck with the freight limit...

 

Given that it's a scenic run with opportunities for photo ops and travels through narrow sandstone canyons with potential for rock falls AND takes 2 days to travel the 430 miles from Moab to Denver AND looks like an old, worn track bed in parts.

I'm thinking 25-30 mph for the Cane Creek section at least.

 

Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads (via Swindon Chippenham and Bath Spa) - 118 miles 25 chains
Euston to Birmingham New Street (via Watford, Milton Keynes, Weedon and Coventry) - 112 miles 73 chains
Neither really likely

Bristol to Birmingham (skipping Gloucester, but via Cheltenham) - 92 miles 31 chains
Not likely either

 

I know it’s not likely but it shouldn’t be totally out of the question now DTG are up to speed with the tools.

 

English Electric loco with Schindler coaches near Aregos, 19May2021

https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ficheiro:CP_1400_Aregos_-_Mosteiro.jpg

 

Bill, hopefully a new gaming company will start up and create Train Simulator or something and build full US and Canadian routes that some of us here wish for with a lively world of cars, birds, planes, real train traffic, real weather including tornado watch, hurricane, hail and blizzard, dispatch, fully modeled stations inside and out, realistic passengers, realistic sounds and correct ambience (city, forest, seaside, tunnel), customs at U.S./ Canadian border (may proceed after clearance notice, 2-3 mins though you can sit there for an hour) and many more wishes... in UE5! And by then, Rail Driver might come out with a new controller.

 

And all for the low, low price of $399.95 per route

 

At least the cost of an average round trip ticket of $140 would be nice.

 

full line routes don't mean high prices you know

 

The user stated "build full US and Canadian routes..." For some of those I would say the $400 quoted would be too low.

 

How about a Schengen Zone International route example is the Duisburg Oberhausen-Arnhem Railway. Even better 220 km 135 mi Duisburg-Oberhausen-Arnhem Utrecht Amsterdam railway. You end up serving two things at once introducing the Netherlands and making HRR Busy with a Bochum Ehrenfeld freight service following the S3 from Mülheim an Der Ruhr to Oberhausen Hbf.

 

But " a lively world of cars, birds, planes, real train traffic, real weather including tornado watch, hurricane, hail and blizzard, dispatch, fully modeled stations inside and out, realistic passengers, realistic sounds and correct ambience (city, forest, seaside, tunnel), customs at U.S./ Canadian border (may proceed after clearance notice, 2-3 mins though you can sit there for an hour)" does

 

One answer might be going down the ATS/ETS2 route (pun intended) using selective compression to create the illusion of a long journey, but in something like 1:15 scale (1:20 for the US). You get a representation of the key cities or towns and the scenery highlights in between but much quicker to make and drive. You might have to reduce the scaling slightly to be more suited to a rail network, but I would be quite interested to drive Euston to Glasgow in the distance of say 50 miles, if it was done well.

 

I would see not point in this in any game which touts itself as a simulator. That would be like a le mans simulator saying "yeah five laps is fine mate, don't worry about the rest, its much of a muchness!"

 

NO! NonononoNO!!!!!
That's the very reason I played ETS precisely once and returned it. I have no interest in driving trains through Madurodam and calling it a "simulation."

 

Oh well, it was just a thought…

 

Agreed. Scaling is so Super Nintendo. I can play F-Zero for no more than 3 hours (achieving and beating Master level), but wish badly to have a FULL 400 mile Amtrak route

 

Not quite. Look at "Train route", a game released in the last six months that definitely is NOT to scale...

 

Actually I like ETS2 being scaled. I dont think I would play it if i really had to take 5 days to drive between lisbon and berlin... on the other hand, what you did with ETS was what ahppened when i tried Train Life: a railway simulator... it is scaled.... and it doesnt work for me.
why?
well, ETS may have a scaled world but vehicle behavior is pretty much decent in terms of simulation... You experience the acceleration, braking reaction and such physical and mathematical simulations quite well according to truck specs.
Train Life? oh boy... scaled world... too scaled, if you know what I mean... and scaled physical behavior.... you can drive 'on sight' and the trains physics makes it look more like a kart simulator then a train...
awful experience!

 

I disagree with this. Just have a look at the details of the stations, you may not even notice them. For those days they created a very busy timetable with over 300 services, two yards and so on. Also the built a loader and so on. It is not just three locomotives. Later on they developed a lot more functionality, but also given it is the second route for TSW it is well done and interesting enough.

 

Remember the immortal words of DTG when they said 'making longer routes is not a problem but making them interesting is'.

 

Long routes can be interesting and many full line routes around the world aren't 100+ miles long so I never understood that statement especially since DTG are trying to make longer routes

 

A lot of players also mention they usually not playing tsw for more than 1 hour. Thats probably the case for most of the time. But mixing that with the question about route lenght or ets2 doesnt make any sense to me.

ETS2:
You get from point a to point b, thats how the game is based on. If point b would be a real scale distance the game wouldnt be fun anymore for many people. Beside that the simulation aspect is way lower as in tsw2. Thats why you cant compare them.

TSW2:
To bring the example of the harlem line, if you dont have much time, do a service to white plains, and if you have more time another day you can do a service from grand central to southeast. Also somebody mentioned one time; a longer route gives the playe a hell of choice. I totally agree on that.
Beside the archivement hunting, there is no problem to take over a passenger service at any point of its line. Since DTG improved the traffic side of the routes a lot, even on a long route you have short services too.

On the business case site, DTG wont for sure not create longer routes for the same amount of money. Thats why merging / extending has to be forced in development.

- Nobody will get forced to pay more money on a long route:
- You can just buy your extensions to a point you like
- The gameplay aspect brings you a lot of possibilities

Well i liked the discussions about longer routes & merging / extensions past few months. As a customer wants to pay, and seeing how DTG is ingnoring this very topic, sometimes this looks to me like:



TSW should be THE improved follower of TS Classic, not a niche product parallel to it.