150 Adjustment Confirmed By Jasper On Roadmap Stream Query

Hello,
Not my first time talking about this and certainly won't be my last.

I cannot be bothered to quote exactly what was said, but it seems that River/Jasper had advised that the timetable would need tweaking for the Class 150. Firstly, I wanted to add my 50p in and say that surely if they had done this correctly in the first place when postponing release of WCL, there would be no need to alter physics, sounds and the timetable originally issued.

All I want to do is use this DMU as it should be simulated. I mean take a look at the 166 now, it's a dream!

How do I get this sorted as it has taken too long...

 

Why should I have to wait for a fix, when said product is broken and I am staying that it doesn't mean the sounds are fixed. If you are going to bother replying to my thread, don't insult me and speak to me in a tone that is acceptable.

I have been asking for this to be resolved for a long time, I just wish they would have taken on the feedback and all the research detail we had provided and offered, then we would not be in this mess.

 

Hmmmmm.

 

He did not once mention sounds, only physics related fixes.

 

Go on, say something a bit more constructive. I know you want to

 

Ah, another entitled overbearing post about something you have no control over.
See... that's an insult, but also true
The reason Rivet don't listen to what you tell them is because they don't need to, but obviously they fouled it up and then denied all fixes until now which makes them look foolish, so maybe they SHOULD have, but they're not under any onus to listen to anyone specific

 

Yeah I get that, just wanted to be of some help so that it can relish the same challenges it does on the TSC version. It's represented so well by AP.

 

I suggest you lower your expectations. Rivet hasn't been able to fix the BR204, which has the exact same transmission problem. They said it would be to long/expensive to fix it because it would require redoing it almost from the ground up.
Hence, do not expect a proper fix for the 150. Rivet never learn.

 

The best policy where Rivet are concerned, at least going forward, is passive resistance. Just don’t buy any of their future products. As regards the 150, well great if they fix it up but they still need to sort out the Great Cornish Forest and the Winterfell tree stumps before I contemplate rebuying West Cornwall.

 

The best advice anyone can have is right here. ^

If you don't like or have an issue with what Rivet put out, then don't buy anything else of theirs until they address the issue or improve the overall quality. I've never purchased any of their TSW dlc's and I'm confident that unless something significant changes, my money will stay in my pocket. Why should I work hard for my money only to give it to a bunch of people who's work produces half baked rubbish..

 

Well hopefully they don't take up the AP model else to drive one scenario you'd need to spend about £500 and then find a few years later they orphan your content.

 

TS tools!

 

That they were now correct? maybe my ears deceived me..

 

Ah yes, the old fall back.
That's a bit like buying a car and then saying "It's fine, I'll just change the engine, radio and tyres because the roof looks fine"
Not a business model I want any other company following thanks. When I pay for something it should work in it's entirety when it's sold rather than having orphaned consists and a further load of requirements

 

Fully entitled to your opinion, though it makes for immersion to use your own purchases and replace them with the ones that AP 'recommend'.

 

I think you're not reading what I'm saying.
AP sell packages with scenarios which you cannot play without undertaking changes because they've taken required packages off sale
AP sell packages with scenarios which you cannot play without spending large amounts of money or having to undertake large changes to play in any way as intended because if you don't you end up with missing trains, trains where you only see bogies flowing past, or worse missed interactions

I'm not talking about making changes AP advise, I'm saying AP are not the best to quote when it comes to business practice, even if they make decent assets and programming. I bought everything they made up to Jan 2020 but got fed up when I specifically asked if they were going to update orphaned content and got a blank "No" in return

 

Ahh, now I get you. So basically, you are required to own all content produced by themselves? (AP). I've bought loads but even I didn't realise that.

 

For it to work as intended (ie what I paid for) yes. You can change things out yourself but then it's not what I paid for and there can be consequences.
Say I don't own the AP 319 EPs (there are two) so I spend an hour swapping out all consists for the DTG 319s, 1 - I just spent an hour of my time and 2 - they might work differently than the AP ones so timings would be off etc, which can crash the scenario

Let's say I don't swap something out properly, ghost trains...

Let's say they stop selling a requirement. You get the idea
AP have done all three

 

Yeah, I have a feeling I've had this issue in the past and then it doesn't run right etc. Also, lots of errors and crashes. I mean when it does work correctly, it's great but when it doesn't, I gather it's a disaster.

One thing I will say though is that in quick drive mode, all sold products by AP do have great quality to them.

 

Yeah a different angle makes sense, I just know that for the future of Train simming for DTG, these things need to be right first time. The reason (personally) for this is so that the reliability and trust factor of the brand 'TSW' is stable going forward, especially when issuing 3rd parties with the tools to build DLC.

 

As I said, the assets and programming is great (probably best in the TSC game), the rest I could do without
On top of shoddy route creation by many many others (not AP, they only did one route I know of) I gave up on TSC two years ago

 

Re: AP products on TSC.
You only need the extra requirements if you want to run the scenarios. If you only want to create your own scenarios or run free drives then you don't need the extra packs and stock.
There's a massive discussion on the TSC forum about AP and his business model.
One thing to note (apart from the removal of packs) is the fact that every time he releases a new pack, he goes back to edit scenarios in other packs making the newest one a requirement for the older packs and scenarios.

 

The scenarios are only part of what you are purchasing. Personally I don't buy the AP packs for the scenarios but for the enhanced models and sound and functionality improvements, I make my own although the AP ones are very good.

It would be good though if they kept each scenario as originally authored and also an updated one for those who do own any updated stock they require and wish to use them.

 

I buy the AP items because a lot of the time they are requirements for 3rd party scenarios on other routes scenarios (JT for example) or freeware routes. Yes, they are good products and so much better than 99% of the default stock but some also like to play the scenarios contained within the pack.
I don't update any pack once I have bought it unless it is a patch to fix something broken.

 

The thing is, I much prefer the quick drive option. On the other hand, I don't like getting to the end of the route (for example) and then going back to the menu. I really think TSW has the ultimate option of being able to move around and going from one end of the route and coming back again, so to speak.

 

So what were we saying about the Rivet 150 then?

 

It's been said

 

Can't swear on this forum

 

To be honest I found Jasper's comments on the 150 somewhat encouraging, he definitely seemed well aware of the particular disappointments people have with the unit and to me it seemed like they have made steps to resolve those issues. Will it be perfect, I have no idea but if they sort out the big shortcomings of the 150 then it'll probably climb quite a ways up my list of most frequently played trains on the game.

 

Were not some of the problems with the sounds caused by the way the physics are set up? I thought it was a case of the sounds are there but because the physics do not cause the train to perform realistically that it affects the way the sounds are implemented, or am I talking out of the top of my hat?!

 

That was a lot of the problem yes, but I gave up correcting people on that after the fiftieth time
"Oh it doesn't sound like that when you start it up", "Yes because you normally shove it in step 5 and wait for it to start moving", "It doesn't sound right...!"
Sigh

 

I'm not sure if that's ever been confirmed but it's definitely been speculated by quite a few people

 

So basically the crappy sounds currently implemented on the 150, which sound really quiet, under powered and generally like a weak class 150 are infact only sounding like this due to poor physics implementation when it was being constructed by Rivet?

I mean there is no bassy sound from the cab as you would expect, as they really do have a good rev up sound anyway..?

 

Hey folks, nice to see that a few appreciate us going back to released content (and doing along the lines of a preservation crew update). We're not quite sure what the overall size is going to be, but here's what will be in the update for sure:

• Characteristic 2s startup delay between rev up and move off
• Slower and more accurate acceleration between 0 and 30 mph (about 25s slower 0-60)
• Revs will no longer drop when going into forwards or reverse

We're having a look at the timetable too, but what's happening to it isn't sure yet.

Not really. I said that it'll rev up longer now before it then starts going. We'll have a look if we can get our audio guy to have a look at it, but that's a big MAYBE right now.

alexjjones6024 I couldn't find nearly as many messages from you as your intial post suggests. Nevertheless, I'm glad we could talk on Facebook and will review what you send via email. Many thanks in advance!

 

Hi Jasper,

Thanks for getting back to me. Today is a new day and I believe you literally replied to my post yesterday afternoon so will alter that part of my initial post

Thanks for getting back to me though.

As for the sounds, why can't DTG look into this, seen as they have taken on preservation updates and have recently got somebody on board who has improved sounds of many locos?

Those videos provided should show how the departure sounds work and these should already be ready to ship from the recordings provided by AP?

 

Best policy I've ever heard

 

Jasper, my apologies. Can you check how the sound/physics operate with the AI class 150's as it would still require to be similar to how we would drive it when loading into the route.

Cheers

 

I don't think that Dovetail is going back and fixing our products - that seems a bit weird to me. If they're up for it, worth having a talk with our team (communication has never made things worse ^^).

Not sure if we can do much about the AI trains, because these usually have a way simplified physic simulation (I think that's what it still is, correct me if I'm wrong).

 

Jasper, please, please!!! Make DB BR150 a separate view camera from the cabin window. I want to look out the window and inspect the platform.

 

This is correct, AI trains have very simple physics. It has changed slightly over time, they accelerate less like Star Trek Warp 9 now but its still quicker than players can do it.

Paul

 

This is great but three other important things that need addressing are
>Throttle interlock - ALL throttle notches should be available in brake step 1.
> Acceleration above 70mph in notches 1, 2 or 3 shouldn’t be happening. Notch 4 roughly holds it steady at 75 and anything below that provides a very gradual deceleration.
> Internal brake rub is essential, not the quiet sound you have on at the moment. 30 seconds on a real unit and you’ll see what I mean.

 

Absolutely 100% big thank you to Jasper and the whole team . I can only speak for myself personally but this is a major positive for me and is a massive factor in if I buy future products or not. Knowing a developer is listening and engaged with the community is a really positive thing and a selling point. WCL was the first Rivet DLC I bought and was probably going to be last, it was only really the 90's setting that lured me in.

It would be great if this was a normal part of the release process i.e. Release -> Patch after 1-2 weeks to fix urgent bugs -> Long term quality of life patch after 3 months to fix a wider range of smaller problems. Some amount of ongoing support for a limited period should be budgeted right from the start of the project. Happy customers = future profits (I assume). Just knowing that this & future releases aren't fire & forget money printing exercises I think would really change peoples perceptions of issues, big disappointments become minor annoyances.

 

Release without these issues in the first place would be much better. Rivet have stated previously they are listening but done very little. The Bakerloo 1938 stock still has sound issues, Arosa still has issues. They are supposedly a professional developer who should know what they are doing before taking on a project. Even if the 150 is fixed (and we have yet to see the proof of the pudding) that still leaves all the issues with the WCL route itself.

 

All I would suggest to Rivet is listening to AP's original 150 sounds, at the very least for a frame of reference.

 

How long has has the 150 been released i wouldn't be thanking them
It should of been fixed before release or just after not months down the line
And now you have caused people on ps to have broken sea don't you test

 

That's why I have made this post as they needed a kick up the LOVE!!

I'm trying to get them to turn this around as they have EVERYTHING that is needed to make this right. The tools, the references, sounds, physics info (DTG) and there is plenty of drivers eye views of the route for reference, so that it can be improved to the standard it requires and that we deserve as customers of this product.

DTG are far too lax about it and dont step on and don't manage their 3rd party developers. Hence why on Glassdoor, their current and ex staff have had bad experiences when working for DTG..

I'm sick of all this too buddy.

 

Think Rivet forget some of us have paid for this, which some of us have spent hours at work to get. You are right, they have everything, and if they don't fix it, and keep releasing sub-par products they won't have much of a business because people will not buy there stuff and also because they know it won't be fixed.

 

Jasper_Rivet Will all due respect, I think you guys really need to look and listen at this video

Your version of the Class 150 sounds very poor in comparison. As mentioned, there’s a distinct lack of revving going on upon departure, lack of brake rub sounds, and for for strange reason, why do the engine idle sounds, sound faster when the reverser is in neutral/off vs forward? The horn is also very, very quiet in the cab.

You guys really shouldn’t have chosen the Class 150 if you don’t know how it sounds and behaves in real life.

 

Thank you for joining the thread londonmidland , I really need this to be broadcast before they send it off ot DTG for QA etc.

Jasper_Rivet please do the honour and take note, your Dev team can really make the current 150 into a fantastic piece of kit. Can you please forward the above video on to the dev team as this shows each rev and how it should behave!!

 

I have suggested this a thousand times. They’ve got their sounds…. There are demo videos on YouTube that both me and Alex have sent links to numerous times.