Only in that it would be more user friendly than needing to insert the switch in the startup routine of the steam library, desktop icon or however Epic works... One could just as easily say that having detail sliders in game isn't useful because people don't change them between routes.
ok i know it's not exactly a DX thing.... but every route DLC is effectively a different game in TSW... hence people who play with the .ini settings can get one DLC to work almost stutter free, then the next DLC they try with those settings runs at a 5fps slideshow. There seems to be so little optimization in TSW, thats a place i really think they need to work on the most, employ a few people who can go over everything and find the bottlenecks and fix them.
Don't try to pull that. You know as well as anyone else that Dovetail will let major issues sit (let alone the plethora of smaller issues), and focus on pumping out new content instead of fixing those issues. Wouldn't surprise me at all if that mentality is part of the core reason for why they would rather release some graphical improvements under the guise of a new game called TSW3; so that they don't have to commit to reworking anything for older routes. They've already said that the only thing older routes will get is dynamic weather, which probably took no extra effort to allow anyway. It's probably just an extra weather setting you can choose in Service mode, which would be a global addition. Same deal happened when TSW2 released as well, with the handful of improvements being disguised as a new game, and the older routes not receiving them. This is something that other, better developers such as SCS Software, would never dream of doing. Every improvement they have made to the game that can be applied to older content, has been applied to older content, as soon as those improvements came to the game. Always for free as well. SCS only charges for new content. Only sometimes too, at that. New trucks are free, for example. Extensions of existing maps are free, if you own them. Sometimes they even add entirely new content into existing DLCs, just because. You own the Krone trailer pack? Here, have a few extra Krone trailers on the house. Dovetail's management should really take inspiration from their more successful peers. Angering customers over and over again, over the course of a decade, is far from the most ideal business model.
I was responding to a comment which made out that NO updates to any old content was done by DTG which is clearly not the case. If someone is making a valid case then fine, but that wasn't one. Erm, no... At least TSW1 to 2 was a UE engine revision move whereas TSW2 to 3 isnt, but there was definitely more to the move to TSW2 than "a handful of improvements" DTG are charging for new content. There's two new, one fully revised and and one minorly revised DLC on offer. Whether we like those choices or not doesn't negate that they exist. Good for them. So what? What others do has no bearing on what DTG does, same as what I do or say has no bearing on your acceptance of their practices or purchase of their software... I'm not saying your basic premise isn't valid, it is valid. There is little in the update that will change the experience for me, but to say there's no new content or that it's a really good, well thought out and well executed upgrade, but at least put it as it actually is. You're getting an upgrade, new route possibilities, new trains, additional life for SEHS, additional clouds for SoS and so on. That's "not nothing"
What I said was: SCS also goes back to improve older content for free, whereas Dovetail has only been doing so in these full priced re-releases of the same game. I'm talking about the little revamp they did to Sandpatch Grade, and the extension to the UK route they are doing now. Bug fixes are a given. A minor version upgrade with the Unreal engine, yes. Anyone familiar with UE will tell you this is not a big deal, and does not require much work. Even a move to UE5 wouldn't need a full rewrite. As for actual gameplay features, yeah, I'd say a handful of improvements. Wheel slip, wagon weight. Some graphical improvements. A livery editor and a basic scenario planner too, for those interested. Am I missing much? Granted, it's been two years now, so it is possible I am excluding even smaller features than that. Nonetheless, the features I did list sound like what should have been in a free update to me, much like what's being advertised for TSW3 sounds like what should be in another free update. Sure, we have two new routes, and one new locomotive on the German one. Fair enough. What if you aren't interested in those, though? You are still being made to purchase at least one of them in order to continue receiving updates and any additional content for the game at all. Including any possible future fixes to routes you already own. You're right though, it's a choice that does exist... buy something you may not want, or give up on Dovetail. Quite a lot of people are choosing the latter, as usual at this point. I'm saying it should have a bearing on them. If Dovetail took after their more successful peers, it would undoubtably make for a happier, ever-growing customer base. This would benefit Dovetail as well as us. An upgrade that should have been free, two new routes and one new locomotive that people may not want, and some more improvements to existing things that also should have been free. All in a $50 package, which is mandatory if you want to continue getting updates or any future content at all. Just like with TSW2. It's really no wonder so many people are upset once again.
The move from 4.16 to 4.23 is bigger than the move from 4.23 to 5.00 from what I've seen. Wait, there are gameplay features?!?. I haven't seen any yet unless you count dynamic adhesion thrown in with dynamic weather (which I haven't yet seen as actually dynamic, it could be "programmed" as it was before. Got you. So the most successful IT companies are Apple, Samsung, IBM and Microsoft. Apple who slow things down to make you buy new stuff Samsung who life expire their batteries to make you new stuff IBM who provided data services to the Nazis through world war II And lets not start on Microsoft... it's too hot
I've seen otherwise from my own experience, and also heard otherwise from others I know who work with UE much more closely than I do. If Dovetail had any trouble with the move, I'd be far more inclined to believe it was on them, and their own code. This is becoming too speculative now though. My point exactly. Never mentioned a thing about any of those companies, so I have no idea what you are on about. I mentioned SCS Software as my example. They are a company of a similar scale as Dovetail, making a similar type of game, and they started with a similarly sized playerbase a decade back, when ETS2 and Train Simulator both hit Steam. SCS's approach has made them very successful over the past decade, and has earned them an ever-growing, loyal player base. They have been able to grow their company considerably since then as a result (a fact they seem genuinely very humbled by when they discuss it in their live streams, for the record). Dovetail's approach has angered countless customers, seemingly enough to make them lose just as many as they bring in. Their player base has not grown much at all over the past decade, as we can see on steam charts. I already linked this stuff above, but I'll list it here for convenience. Jan 2013 Peak Players Train Simulator: 2,373 Euro Truck Simulator 2: 2,837 July 2022 Peak Players Train Simulator: 1,615 Euro Truck Simulator 2: 38,102 All Time Peak Players Train Simulator: 3,806 - August, 2014 Euro Truck Simulator 2: 60,883 - March, 2020 Oh Deebz, you're being silly. Train Simulator was replaced by the Train Sim World series in 2017, you goof. Show the July 2022 numbers for that instead. Ok, sure. Train Sim World 1: 63 Train Sim World 2: 1,074 Oh... what about all time peak between Train Sim World 1 and 2? Here you go. Train Sim World 1: 1,931 - March, 2017 Train Sim World 2: 1,951 - December, 2021 See what I mean?
In fairness there is also the console market that has a larger playerbase for tsw but I get what your saying
Indeed, the console market could be the only thing keeping Dovetail's head above the water for all we know. SCS has not expanded into that market yet, and we don't know the player count on the console platforms for TSW, so I didn't mention it in that comparison. It would not surprise me if SCS saw similar success there too, though.
This really shouldn't be a cause for concern - while it is understandable that people want DTG to diversify, there are 2 ways to look more positively at this: 1 - If you already own SEHS, you probably enjoy it. Now you get even more gameplay and a much fuller, more picturesque experience while knowing that in the future there will be many other routes to play. 2 - If you don't own it and didn't want it, at least you get an expanded collection of rolling stock that potentially fills out other lines for you now and in the future. Worry not, they will inevitably release other lines. Everyone knows DTG tends to stick to the GB/DE/US pattern so this was hardly unexpected. It's still infinitely better than a slightly beautified but functionally identical Sand Patch from last time. And for those who would just whine that they hate UK routes, just buy a regional pack. In summary, not recycled (like Sand Patch was) and there's always reason to NOT be disappointed.
Bitterly disappointed after tonight's stream, so mich so that I've refunded. Nightjet services confirmed on the roadmap as present - completely ignored on stream and no mention of despite questioning. Stuttering mess on Cajon Pass, so bad that even the cars in the back ground stuttered even when the loco was stationary. Both Matt & JD completely ignored this despite comments again on the chat. I could go on all night but I'll leave it there. Seems like they spent over the course of the stream a good 3 -4 minutes bigging up the intro music which could have been spent actually addressing concerns raised in the chat. Afterall no one buys a game because of how good the intro music is or isn't
You said "DTG should learn from their more successful peers" SCS are minnows. They're nothing. The companies I quoted are worth billions. If you want to cherry pick examples, fine, but when making broad sweeping statements that includes everything and everyone. Again, not saying DTG are good in what they do (we know they're not) but what other people do IS NOT RELEVANT DTG have shown time and again they won't do what others do until they decide to (a la xbox sounds), won't learn from their own mistakes (GWE) and won't improve things that are really important and they know they're issues (save game function, night lighting, train sounds, I could go on). So let's deal with what we are dealing with rather than quoting random other companies who also fail and aren't important as exemplars?
No matter how "badass" there music may be just hearing it connected to a train sim game just doesn't feel right.TSW3 needs to inspire players with the idea that it's truly the next evolution in train sim world gaming,but the choice of music being a rap song for TSW3 intro theme just doesn't fit this kind of game in even the slightest way.
I see nothing except a comparison with a not comparable game. Please compare with other train simulators. Not with a game that is road based (what is way easier to make that track based games) and uses a 1by10 shrinking factor for their maps. Of course they can spend lots of more effort into things like better lightning and maybe some free updates. I played the SCS games a lot and i do create stuff for TSW for a while now. Believe me, you can't compare the effort that goes in. A train simulator per se is a way bigger pack to carry than most AAA road based games (and SCS is not even AAA at any aspect).
I always thought flight and trains sims were more comparable in terms of system depth and complexity, rather than truck sims. With flight more of the complexity goes on the planes themselves, the airports can be reasonably basic, while with train sims more of the complexity is in the routes and the safety systems. Regarding other train sims ZuSi 3: Aerosoft Edition All Time Peak: 112 24h Peak: 59 Don't think Derail Valley, Train Life and Trainz are comparable, and Run8 isn't on steam
Nevertheless, SCS seem to know how to keep customers happy. The compressed world is a gameplay mechanic and it maintains the illusion of serving a large area and does it very well. Though admittedly some areas in ETS2 notably the UK are in need of a makeover. Some users have also created 1:1 maps as mods (at least unlike TSW, SCS supply an editor). The whole game (ETS2 and ATS) has been designed so that modules can be slotted in as the DLC is developed. Next one of ETS2 is West Balkans and I have a feeling it's going to rock. DTG can't even fix their existing routes in TSW let alone add to them (if we are to believe the claim SEHS has been rebuilt from the ground up). If you regard SCS as not a AAA games producer that's a little ingenuous. On that scaling I would rate DTG's current inept performance with TSW (all iterations) somewhere around FFF.
The complexity of the planes themselves is probably greater than in trains, very few settings comparably between the two The difference is that in a train sim you need "the view out the window" to look good at slow and high speeds (for a train) so thats everything from 1 meter to 1 mile to look good, be lit and shadowed from the angle of 3m off the ground. Then you have to make it look good from OUTSIDE as well (so the train itself, and the ground, close, medium and distant scenery, again lit and shadowed etc etc) And all that whether at a stand (so zero mph) or at 140mph + on a high speed route. For the trains themselves you might have a closing speed of 280mph+ ! from what I've seen on MSFS for example, take a stroll away from the planes to the car park next door and everything gets "quite blocky" It's also possible in TSW (and even TSC) to fly away from the main focus (ie the stations and trains) and view local properties. I live close enough to a train station that I can see my house in TSC (not quite in TSW if I remember) and it is indeed shown as a house, with the shop up the road represented too. You don't get that in MSFS (but nobody cares)
Agree with the higher complexity in aircraft and wrote it myself on the comment you quoted, but they lack the "ground based" complexity if that makes sense, things going from signals and safety systems to the dispatcher. Regarding visual fidelity you are of course correct, the MSFS graphics are good for a flight sim, but would be awful for a train sim, but I was mainly talking about physics and systems. I do have to disagree with that I'm afraid. Unless the creators of a route put some special amount of care in it, it's more likely than not that, unless your house is a particularly recognizable landmark, it will be represented with one of the many generic houses assets. In MSFS however if you live in a place covered by photogrammetry the actual geometry of that house will be reproduced, it won't be as high fidelity as one made for a ground-based sim of course, but both are compromises that make sense for each game. The city where I live has photogrammetry in MSFS and I can clearly see each house and property has been represented correctly, the only problem is the ridiculous amount of trees and "lumps" randomly placed everywhere. Train Sims are only focused on a few Kms surrounding the represented rail line, in MSFS depending on photogrammetry cover you have either a somewhat OK reproduction of the whole world or a very accurate depiction of it.
RE: the complexity of the train based stuff... signals, safety systems, dispatcher etc...... Isnt that something Zusi3 (hobby edition) does... and does well enough for it to be used as actual real life training for some people to become train drivers. i.e. they have the signals spot on, working exactly as they do in real life, the safety systems all work as if you were in a real train, and the dispatcher has some intelligence, if you start to lose time on your run, you throw all the other timetabled services out, and it has knock on effects for you... i.e. your paths will be changed to let the other services past in some places. they even have random signal failures, then all the nice bits like the remote displays for MFA's and EBuLa's, direct input for all controller types and so on. and it manages to do all this on a PC spec that's so basic, you could probably port it to a PS2. obviously where zusi falls down for people used to TSC and so on is the graphics, but the physics, safety systems, dispatcher etc are all light years ahead of TSW i think.
From what I understand ZuSi is better for signals, safety systems and dispatcher, but maybe SimuGraph has the potential to be more realistic in terms of physics if someone bothers to take the time to make a good train (like the BR101)
Oh of course, but in MSFS it won't be represented except as a photo. Fly to 10 from my door and TSC has the better representation (I've tried it) The comment was supposed to highlight the complexity of doing EVERYTHING in TSW whereas in flightsims you focus mainly on how planes work and how ground looks from a few thousand feet. Very different mechanics and requriements
Don't forget that ZUSI has grown to what it is now over about 20+ years now. And it does not even have a near contemporary visual representation nor a really usable menu system. It is what it ever was, a pure number cruncher (and it is doing it in a good way, no doubts). The first two things are only possible because one element that TSW has is missing and will be missing forever, the ability to jump into the timetable at any time. ZUSIs timetable has to start from its start time, always, every started session starts with the start time of the selected timetable and then you need to fast forward, what can need some time dependent on the PC specs, just to get to your desired train and departing time. That is nothing modern casual player, like TSW targets, would accept. And so, ZUSI is not a big seller anywhere.
I've said in the past that TSW should be built from the signals up rather than the trains down (Which seems to be the case here) If a signal says go, you go. Otherwise you slow down and stop At least in TSW3 SEHS the TPWS is apparently working, but we shall see whether that's A true and B gets used in all future UK routes
Did you never played TSW yet? You select a time to spawn on foot and there you go. There is nothing like that in ZUSI. In ZUSI you select a timetable (loading a file from disk you have to know about), then selecting a train that you want to drive, then start the simulation what can take a good long while, then you are at the very start of that timetable and not in your train (except the train starts right at that time). They you have two options. You can wait in real time until the time has come to start your run. Or you use the fast forward commands and "jump" to the time. It's not really a jump to. The simulation just runs as fast as your PC can and that is why they can handle "imperfections" in the "train-dance" on the route. It's always a real time simulation. In TSW it is pre-simulated and therefor they cant add random delays or something (yet). But you can jump in at any time with that directly.
I bet if TSW handled the timetables like zusi does, there'd be no problems with save games etc, when restarting the game after a save, it'd start all the timetables again and run through them in hyper fast time, then transport you to the time and position you were when you saved it, and all other trains would be at the places they should have been when the save was made too.... i must point out i've never tried the save feature of any train based game, i pick a run that i have time to complete, and if i for some reason need to leave the computer before the run is finished, i'll pause it or close it, but i'm a non competitive person, so i don't chase points or trophies / medals, i just want to drive the trains. As Maik points out, a hardcore train simmer is happy with how zusi works as they know what's going on in the background, But zusi would never be something any one who wants to just 'play a game of trains', or console users would tolerate, whilst some people spawn on foot in TSW then wait for a train they want to take over, i don't think they spawn at the station a few hours before the train departure time and watch all the others go past, They spawn in a few minutes before the train arrives... i think?.
Yep, been here six years... Not played Zusi though This is what I was kind of getting at. I didn't know that about ZUSI (thanks for that) and I DID know that in TSW they haven't been able to do delays effectively (though they've announced something like it for rain delays in TSW3 so maybe in future who knows?) TSC had a fast forward function too, though I haven't seen anything similar in TSW
I wonder if this process could be made automatic and "hidden" behind a slower loading screen? So when you pick a service, all the player sees is the loading screen, meanwhile the game is starting the timetable from it's natural start time (let's say 00:00) and fast forwarding to the start time of your journey, when it's done the loading screen goes away and you are in your train waiting for departure. I have no idea how much it would hinder loading times, but if it allows for random events and a better dispatcher it would be a compromise I'd be willing to make. I got used to painful loading times with MSFS already so... I believe DTG has the tools to speed up the timetable as they talked about using that function for QA purposes but don't quote me on that
Yeah they said that in reference the QA testing, otherwise they wouldn't be able to test as much as they do (in real time)
I said more successful peers. As in, other simulator developers who have had more success. I find it hard to believe that I actually need to explain this to anyone, seems rather obvious. This is a good example of someone who does not know what they are talking about. It takes SCS years to make map DLCs, which they release generally less than half of the price of a Dovetail DLC. They are working on Texas for American Truck Simulator, and it has been in development since 2018, and may only release at the end of this year. If you want to talk about how much work goes into something, I think SCS even takes the win on this issue. Especially since the amount of road available to drive far exceeds the 50ish mile average that you've generally gotten with TSW routes, until these latest three ones. Yes, even after being scaled down. To give you an idea of the sheer size difference, it took me multiple days to fully discover their latest map, Montana. That was with me speeding game time up by 4x, and driving at a top speed of 65 MPH. That makes for an effective top speed of 260 MPH. At similar speeds, do you really believe it would take much more than an hour at most to see an entire TSW route? I'd wager even less in some cases. Though perhaps the difference in speed is not just related to size. Perhaps the difference is the fact that SCS takes time to make sure it's high quality before release, whereas Dovetail pushes things through with minimal quality assurance before moving onto the next thing?
I have always suspected that SimuGraph has been severely talked up by DTG, and in fact is little different to how other train simulators work.
Ah, so still Microsoft then... Why limit it to simulator developers though? None of them are AAA studios, so in essence they're all "a bit lacking" What, the person who's been developing for TSC and TSW for years? That person you just said "didn't know what they're talking about"? The time it takes to develop content doesn't show COMPETENCE. I could probably take four years to make one DLC in any comparable system and make it just as well. Four years is an eternity in dev cycles, and YOU are questioning others on these things?!? I think I'm bailing on this convo as you're basically calling out the wrong things and not showing that other software to be professional or well done in the slightest
I thought I'd bring you up to speed, he's the guy that: Made the BR101 the best loco DLC (Phsyics and sounds) Helped made the BR423 sounds (and physics?) Helped with the BR612 physics, sound and tilting system Among a plethora of other german trains both in TSW and TS.
Because comparing completely unrelated companies to a simulator developer is daft. I am comparing two companies who were at very similar standing a decade ago, and listing the reasons I see as to why one was successful, while the other was not. Yes, and I stand by that. He clearly has no clue what he is talking about on the truck simulator side if he thinks it takes less effort to develop for. You also don't know what you are talking about. Go ahead and bail then. Texas is orders of magnitude larger than any TSW route you will ever see, and SCS's work as of the last few years has been top notch in realism. That's the main reason why it takes longer, and I know damn well that is a wish TSW players have of Dovetail. Larger, more detailed routes. Not to mention actually running them through quality control before release, which is something else SCS players don't need to worry about. I am much happier to wait for one of their higher quality products than I am to see the latest Dovetail DLC, and wonder what all will be broken and never fixed in it.
So you are saying DTG are unsuccessful? I am sure that will be news to their employees! The cry of reasoned argument!
Comparing developers to developers. All of the companies I listed develop software systems which use data, inputs, controls, outputs, multiple graphics options... And why is DTG "not successful". Where's your basis for that, your figures? From what I understand DTG wouldn't count as an SME any more as they have over 100 staff and their turnover is in seven figures. Right... Pure rubbish. You can import the whole of Texas from Google data in an afternoon... Absolute tosh Larger more detailed routes with scenery detail down to about 1m distant, so again, hardly a comparrison to what DTG have to try to do in TSW or TSC. Four years to make one DLC and you put that across as "success"... the mind boggles
I think what he meant is that the two are to a certain degree not comparable. When it comes to ETS there are no complex systems like there are in a train or a flight simulator, it mostly revolves around gameplay and scenery, there is nothing comparable to even the basic AWS system in ETS, let alone PZB, LZB and ETCS. Let's talk about DCS, do you think paying $80 for a module is a scam? And there are quite a few bugs there as well, what about $80/35 for a plane is MSFS? I think that is a more reasonable comparison to a DTG DLC rather than any truck sim addition. You can argue that SCS is better at what their are doing than DTG, and that would be fine especially on the QA/bug fixing part, but trying to directly compare a DTG DLC to a SCS DLC makes little sense.
When Dovetail burns through as many customers as they do, rather than growing their playerbase, yeah I'd say they are less successful than others. Are you actually attempting to be serious? Please tell me you are not this daft. Perhaps you should take a look at SCS's latest work before saying something silly like that, and realize that this DLC will be many, many times larger than any Dovetail route. And when Dovetail can get those systems to actually work correctly, without major flaws that go unfixed, that may be a more compelling comparison in my eyes. Nonetheless, having working traffic AI that behaves well enough for believable legal driving on roads is still a decent challenge, and an ongoing one with SCS's ever-increasing road complexity.
Yes I am serious. You can get their data and import it as a map or as raw data onto any system you like,. then process that programmatically. TSC allows you to do similar to this in their editor with the appropriate API key I did look. Not sure why that's "better" or "worse" than what DTG put out. For example in the top pic of that page the two electricity poles on the right aren't casting shadows, the lighting on the tanker is wrong (compared to the lighting on the back of the car to it's left) etc etc And it looks quite cartoonish? Admittedly they have more scenic clutter and so on, but again.. .four years? If there was no DLC in four years (or one stayed on the roadmap that long) people would be up in arms.
They quite literally are. They are obscured a bit because of the 3D grass. Look closer. That is a chrome tanker. It's reflecting the sky more than that other car. Both are in the shadow from our perspective, so of course the tanker will appear brighter. Besides, you really want to start down that road when the comparison is Train Sim World? It took them this long to have proper HDR lighting, with realistic light scale, on Unreal Engine 4. SCS has had this for almost three years now, and their engine is considerably older. So the map is more detailed, larger, has more gameplay features, and is being subject to actual quality control. And yes, of course other DLCs have been released since 2018. Multiple, for both ATS and ETS2. They don't just work on one at a time.
only a guess here, but i'd imagine lighting for a road based game vs a track based game is going to be harder... the road based game, the vehicle can move to any position on it, even turn around and drive the wrong way, or drive off road etc, and the lighting needs to change for that, rail based, well that to me... takes a lot of the guesswork out of it, the drivers vehicle can only move along a pre-programmed way, it's not easy to suddenly decide to drive your train up the embankment to take a short cut to the depot, you don't have to have other traffic aware of you and need to get out of the way, slow down and let you in when you indicate, brake behind you and not crash into you and so on. yes there are the safety systems on the railway... but again these are all triggers at a specific location, you know the train will be on the tracks, so the trigger point is set in stone so to speak,
Nonsense. All TSC lets you do is overlap a Google Map, but you can't get any data from it - you have to place everything yourself using it as a guide.
I did. Should be shadow out into the road. Maybe it's too low res or I am blind... The car has light points all across it including the bonnet, roof, rear flares and seemingly the back. The tanker is metalic and doesn't seem to have any reflective points. The ground under the tanker is showing shadow, so the top of the tanker cannot be in shadow itself I wouldn't compare them in the way you are. TSW has it's own dumpster fire of bundled mess ups without comparing it to any other studio. It's the way you're going about it which is in question, which means you're saying this other software is an exemplar, and yet it has it's own faults and foibles (as everything does) Then SAY that! I have looked back at the Texas map and if you're saying they have taken map data, placed all the roads, assets, routes etc etc then I can see it would take much much longer than a single TSW route (which obviously is a lot of continuous ribbons), but I still say people would be wondering why it takes four years. We go through entire cycles of users in that time on this game!
Yep, but you get the map to use in game. You can extract the data in other ways (I have done this for other work purposes) if you write your own routines (which is what I meant in that previous response) and you can get and import that data in an afternoon. What you DO with that data can take much longer depending on what it is and how you want it output
Technically it shouldn't matter. You have a lightpoint, a lightflare, and anything that gets in the way is a lightmask Say for example the sun. The sun is at a certain point in the sky, it casts light everywhere (so you don't have to worry about flare particularly), then ANYTHING that gets in the way blocks out some of that light. If it's light clouds you may lose a low percentage of the light. If it's a building or a tree then you lose more at the angle of incidence of the light I think this is what the new lighting system is meant to improve... But basically there shouldn't be too much difference between a road sim and a train sim which should handle light in very similar ways. Where's it coming from, how bright does it start out, how does it reflect, anything blocking it, to what extent is it blocked That makes it sound really easy, but as with most things "saying it is easy, making it work is a damn sight harder"
The issues you are pointing out with the truck sim screenshot don't exist. The shadows are correct, and believe me, the fuel tanker looks just fine in the game. This is starting to sound like the the debate over this moon photo, and whether the astronaut is too bright for this to be a real photo. Anyway, YOU began the comparison with graphics. Not sure why you are calling it my comparison. Sigh. So yeah, people actually did not know what they were talking about, as I said. SCS have made it abundantly clear why it has taken 4 years. It's because of how huge of a project it is, and the fact that they want to get it right. Not to mention they have a pretty full plate with multiple projects for both of their main games currently. They are also doing pre-production work on DLC coming after Texas. And yeah, Dovetail chews through entire playerbases over the span of four years. SCS doesn't. You can say "why does it take so long?" as much as you want, I say the answer is self-evident. Taking time to release a high quality, fairly priced product, is a much better way of retaining customers.
This started as a point from you about updates, and comparing to some other software company that you insisted had to be a simulation developer... And taking four years to make a DLC is a great way of losing them.
