Im shocked to say the least. Call me nit picky but honestly why does it look like that? The rest of the train looks beautiful though What it should look like What it shouldn’t look like
The model is poor. The class 387 has a near identical pantograph as well so in comparison it’s actually terrible
Oh excuse me for wanting aspects of the train model to be somewhat accurate. If you don’t care, move on.
Most of the electrical connections that would transmit power from the catenary to the traction motors seem to be missing. I mean I might not have noticed it if my attention hadn't been drawn to it, but now I can't unsee it.
I see barely any differnce, and I doubt you'll even notice unless you're looking very closely, which I don't think many people will be doing.
I call this a very minor difference detail not something to lose sleep about :P the only difference i can see are the cables on it and a round object in the middle the photo picture is not clear too and different angle so can not compare good enough I think it is close enough
I.... Is there supposed to be a difference then? Because, I don't see one? *insert they're the same image meme here*
If it wasn't pointed out to me what the differences were I wouldn't have any idea so on that basis, I don't care and feel it wouldn't bother the majority.
I would go further than that... But if that is something to complain about, the train must be of extremly high quality.
I really can't see the issue here, well I can barely see any difference. Most people won't even notice, even though my attention has been drawn to it (but what) I will forget all about it if/when I get the DLC. The rest of the train looks really good so for me this won't detract from that.
I don't see any difference. Let me put my specs on... Nope, still nothing. But, I will take your word for it, and I will not buy this DLC, based on this particular issue. Is that the intended result of this rabble-rousing?
Ehhh, it’s good enough. I think that unless you are being very pedantic or are an engineer, you wouldn’t notice this. Back when I did my OLEC training with network rail, they show you about as much detail as the second picture, on a grainy black and white print out , so I think we’ll all be fine with it in game. I will say that overall the OLE aspect of this DLC overall is a downgrade from BCC, but it’s no worse than what we’ve seen before, and there are a lot of other elements that make up for it.
But that’s a dumb principle because it matters on a case by case basis. And also: the pantograph hasn’t been ‘simplified’. It has been accurately recreated.
I was scratching my head for this one. I’ve stopped scratching my head as I am no longer confused and moved on to rubbing my beard to give this feedback some more serious thought. After a good rummage through the whiskers I have come to the conclusion that it’s a case of having expectations that are far too high rather than there being an issue with the pantograph model. It may not be as intricately detailed as some (who are these people?) would like but it is accurately depicted nevertheless.
Anyone here an entomologist with an opinion on how they modeled those moths? Are they realistic? Is their motion accurate?
Wow I feel bad for the OP with all the slander he just received. While it did take me a while to find the differences Trainiac was pointing out, they shouldn't deserve this much trolling for this harmless post. (Personally this is partly what stops me from starting threads of my own, but I digress) I'm sorry Trainiac.
First of all, slander is always verbal, not written. The written equivalent is libel. However, the above are neither: there is nothing here disparaging the author, and nothing blatantly false about the author. Making jokes about the quality of the simulation was not directed at the OP.
You know people complain about the color of the ballast, the accuracy of station lights, the height of the grass, the number of trees, missing buildings, indeed all manner of errors that are mostly non game-breaking. This simplified pantograph ( and I can clearly see the difference ) is Trainiac's particular red flag. We all have one. Mine is headlights, for instance, which nobody else seems to care about. No need for the scorn here.
Sorry, but if you start a thread about two tiny missing cables on a nearly invisble location on the pantograph with this: You do deserve to be made fun of. It is such a tiny deviation that it took me and seemingly others ages to even figure out what was actually wrong. If you blow up an issue like this in the matter the OP did, you may have to live with the consequences. And on a serious note, complaints like these hinder the resolution of actual problems.
This is probably the only time I'm gonna look at the pantograph that closely. I get where your coming from though, the small things matter.
" If you take care of the small things, the big things take care of themselves. " - Emily Dickinson. Meaning: Attention to detail is an indication of your overall performance in things that really matter. If you get the small things wrong, chances are the big things will be wrong too.
I didn't notice this amount of scorn heaped on those who complained that the internal PIS on the 385 has the " wrong font ", or is that a real game breaker?
Well the PIS having the wrong colour and font is something a lot more noticable then what we see in this thread.
Here are the Differences, pointed out for you. I agree with Trainiac there is no cabling , even down where the two thins are!
Really? And how many TSW players from around the world have the intimate knowledge of this train to be able to notice either of these details? But for those who do care about such obscure things as pantograph wiring and PIS fonts, they're important details and they have a right to point them out without being made fun of, don't you agree?