Visions Of Multiplayer

You are contradicting the DtG official website information, DtG's recent mention of MP in their recent survey, and Sam from earlier this year:

 

I have already written several times that the MP will be announced at the earliest, if at all with TSW2, Version 5, and 2024/25. Until then, the other DLCs will probably be updated on passengers over a period of months - and possibly also Timetable in parts.

That will take forever (although older routes will probably not be included before June 2020.)

And that is software not MP capable, it's nonsense. There are enough players with this software that work without any problems. The previous problem with this is the size of a map - since the software is not designed for huge terrain. On the other hand, developers would hardly use any software voluntarily that would not allow synchronization in 2021. And they take in enough revenue through licensing, so it would be a death sentence for the company if it were.


And the updates for the timetable and passengers, even if you had expected new features, were probably necessary to bring the game forward. And I have to say, I've done half the chapters, and I'm really excited about it. Especially when you have to wait for other trains, etc. That would of course be much more in the MP, but thanks to the timetable we now have it up to the MP in the SP.

 

As a long time Wow & Gw player I am very much aware how much time commitment is required for online play and the problems caused by interruptions.

All the really successful multiplayer games involve group challenges and rewards for cooperative play.
I doubt if a rail game can provide those sorts of challenges.
If so, can the social aspects be enough of a reward in itself?
(Stripes on your uniform sleeve or checkered tape for your cab)

Bottom line would be how much benefit in increased sales would Dtg derive from the expense of developing it.

 

The way games like Gran Turismo do this is by not truly simulating other player's cars, just copying their positions. The physics of the car only really matter to the person driving it. So while I am experiencing the full physics engine, the other player's machines only need to show what speed I am going and a few other basic details. And even if they can't do that, the co-op scenarios idea would negate this issue by being very specific in what's simulated and what's not.

(Sorry for the late reply, I often come back to this thread to see what people are saying and for inspiration)

 

Some of these plans were officially dropped, two of them being Multiplayer and Editor, this dark period of history is known as the broken promises and is the very reason DTG is so careful about making 200% sure they differentiate what is actually happening and possible future ideas, anything not set in stone being part of the latter category.

I am fairly sure this is outdated informations, which is no longer holding much value.

 

Where were the official announcements of dropping them made? Where are these claims taken from? Sam's comment in the screenshot is from earlier this year - unless you have DtG comments after that, this cannot be "outdated information".

 

Generally,

About the editor,

About multiplayer,

 

To be fair, from what you quoted it doesn't actually say multiplayer is cancelled, just a bigger challenge than expected.

 

I asked you to show me what communication from the team indicated MP had been "officially dropped", and you link me a post that says "Everyone involved in TSW wanted (and still wants) to include multiplayer"? This is exactly the kind of malicious attempts I was talking about in my first post in this thread.

 

I'm sorry? I can see why Protagonist wanted to clarify it wasn't officially dropped, but your reply telling me of malicious intent is beyond ridiculous.

The official statement, as I'm sure Sam could be willing to confirm, is that, although the plans for MP are not officially dropped, in these past years has definitely not been a priority of any sort.

Is anyone actively developing multiplayer right now? Probabily not. And if they are now, I'm sure it wasn't developed during late 2019, and 2020.

As you saw the editor is in a similar situation, gone from something that apparently was going to come a few months after release AT MOST, to something that maybe will possibly happen in the future.

That list of features has always been a wishlist, and not a roadmap for the game's direction, and THAT was the point, in my eyes those projects have been cancelled, until we know otherwise there is/has been no active development over the past months and is probabily pretty low-down on their priorities. Can/Will this change in the future? I don't know. But it surely was this way in the recent past.

Everyone involved in TSW WANTS to bring more nations into the game, WANTS releases without bugs, WANTS multiplayer, everyone WANTS to release an editor, etc...

TO WANT SOMETHING =/= IT'S IN DEVELOPMENT.

While my statement of those features being officially cancelled was wrong, it wasn't far off, they are not officially cancelled, but unless Sam or anyone else from the dev team wants to add new information on the matter, as far as we know there hasn't been any active development since the early TSW days, and there is little reason to believe this will change in the near future.

For me until it gets confirmed that "we ARE DEVELOPING THIS RIGHT NOW" like for Spirit of Steam I will continue to consider multiplayer as a wish, just like route extensions, better dispatcher, etc...

English isn't my first language but at least I can understand the difference between a wishlist and a development roadmap... and you come to tell me about malicious intentions... what would I ever gain by saying so? I even said I support the idea of multiplayer.

Ridiculous.

 

[removed by Protagonist - argument continuation]

 

[removed by Protagonist - argument continuation]

 

I like that idea a lot

 

Excellent point and for LIRR Metro-North M7 M3s there's a guard position 4th if 8 cars 5th 10 car train & 6th car 12 cars. Towards Southeast Brewster M7A 4th car US freight trains with DPUs SPG Sherman Hill have 2-8 drivers due to Federal regulations that prohibit a one-man operation freight train

 

Thanks.

Indeed, the oft-requested guard mode is something that can be replicated by players very easily with multiplayer, even in basic P2P lobbies. I also didn't know that about US freight - how do they communicate with each other? Is it just walkie-talkies or is there some in-train radio for them to talk over?

It's nice to see multiplayer hasn't been dropped. I have no idea how much you're allowed to say, but has it been worked on (up to a basic test build like TS1 multiplayer), or has there been no attempt yet? If not, has the gameplay of it been discussed at all? I guess if it's not, this thread will be quite useful to DTG!

 

They use in train radio and you see on Smithsonian Channel Mighty trains when they are talking about American and Canadian Freight trains. Remember in the United States and Canada prevent European style single operated freight trains for safety reasons. Think of Lac Megantic 2013 petroleum train accident

 

Run8 has a multiplayer server but it’s only in a yard switching senario from what I seen

 

Sadly multiplayer still isn't in TSW

 

I am still wondering who wants to play all the suggested MP features. DTG has a big focus on consoles. Any of examples of successful MP features in other console games like the features proposed here for MP?

 

Multiplayer has been officially cancelled due to the performance of the game when using it. In effect, it was impossible to get the game running at a satisfactory level with other players, in order to do it they'd need to cut out a very large part of the simulation. The mode was prototyped but as with TS' multiplayer it led to nothing.

 

I feel like if they had multiplayer, there should be private games. Otherwise there would probably be people messing up the timetable and ruining other people's experiences. I'm not saying that multiplayer is a bad thing, but if it ever gets implemented it needs to be done right.

 

I agree

 

Awwwwww. *sad*

 

I'm probably going to ask to get the thread locked as there is no point in it being open.