Ny-trenton: Usa Content Is Still Severely Flawed

These is what I sent back in November if they did the services correctly. I didn’t include the LIRR on this number. I know in real life the LIRR see about 600+ go through Penn

NJT 38 north jersey coast 3-bay head-26 long branch -9 south amboy
55- Morris Essex lines
21-Montclair
8-ratitan
96-NEC 47trenton-14 jersey avenue-1 Princeton 1 New Brunswick 27 Rahway
37- Amtrak -15 northeast regional -11 Acela-11 keystone
Total 255 x2=
510 total services plus another 600+ estimate for LIRR AI services

 

Some of those are diesel though.

 

That’s is correct. But DTG have replaced locos with what’s available in other routes

 

LIRR struggles just on its own. Adding it to an already populated route would likely make it fall over. I mentioned this on another thread. Powerful PCs are not the only platforms this game is played on. I’ve just played a very stuttery BML service on PS5. That route has just had freight services added and it has always had pointless HSTs going past, both of which make the performance suffer greatly. It’s generally a choice of busy or running well. NY Penn is a monstrous station as far as performance is concerned. Fill it up with trains to make it busy and it will crash out.

 

Whatever the extenuating circumstances are, it is a failure to not include NJCL. The route should have been optimized or adjusted, and not released, until this was possible. Yes, the loss of these trains is not realistic and will make the route not feel as busy as it could, but as also mentioned it takes away a gameplay option for shorter services on NJT. It is a real shame and also does not meet even my recently lowered expectations, as well as appearing to be a big step back from what we had in both HAR and NEC-BP.

And if course we have everything else like no LIRR, no M&E, no RVL (would be AI only), no freight in any capacity, incorrect PIS, and who even knows what the transitions will look like between the 3 routes that they have stitched together. My guess is that they figure such a route will attract a lot of new and casual players based solely on name recognition; this also explains the bundles aimed at new players. Quite troubling as it suggests that the current player base is not enough to support the game. Whatever the case, at this stage in the development of TSW I would not consider this route to be a fully finished product.

And if the signals don't work after all? Oh my...

 

I have to say that I am really feeling let down, in that DTG have been taking on criticism (constructive and de-) about NY area routes for five years now. LIRR: partial timetable, poor backdrop/skyline, (added) British PIS terminals. Harlem: partial timetable, poor backdrop/skyline (not even Yankee Stadium or the Empire State building!). Old NEC NY: well, everything.

DTG by now know what the consensus of users is, both on these forums and Steam: realistically busy timetables, branch traffic (even if AI out through portals), distinctive non-generic scenery, correct stations (incl. signage and PIS), variety of services (to include express, commuter and freight), static stock to fill out yards and stations.

And yet they still half-assed this one. There is not a criticism in this thread which is an unrealistic expectation or lies outside of what we know DTG are capable of doing. They just didn't bother.

 

Why in a post covid world is there no reference trips.....?

 

Here’s my 2 cents on NJCL services:

At least on the weekdays, the only trains required to have dual modes would be the 3300 series trains that go to Bay Head. 3200 and 3500 (and 2600 series before they got canned) series trains can, and do regularly use ALP-46-pulled trains.

 

I mean, you guys put the Lake Shore Limited in Boston as AI with a pair of ACS-64s, which actually run with P42s, soo....

 

Some NJCL trains are in fact operated with ALP46s that end in electric territory. In my opinion it would be fine to substitute the ALP46 instead of the ALP45 dual mode. The front of the locos are rather similar in appearance anyway.

 

The same goes for most midtown direct trains going to Dover or Summit (though these would probably go in the non-playable category since they would only occasionally stop at Secaucus as the only nec station). They all can use Alp-46 with multis.

 

If we can do that and LIRR AI Services I think I will be satisfied if everyone is cool having trains go down NJCL

 

While I would say no in most cases (I'm very much a realism sort of person that prefers things to be done as close to irl as possible), I think it'd benefit here as currently, the offering of NJT services sounds severely lacking and underwhelming, so would really help to make NJT feel appropriately busy for the 2nd busiest railroad in the US. I think however in these circumstances, it could be beneficial to have an alternate timetable with just realistic services perhaps. Cause I know you can't ever please everyone, that's just impossible. Or maybe an option to disable layers and/or groups of services from a timetable (although that is getting technical, uses up UI dev's time and resources ect.), so might not be viable. But to summarise, while I would usually say no, I think this route could really use some extra services. And plus, the ALP 46 isn't too different from it's bi-mode sibling, at least when we compare stuff that has subbed in for something that isn't in the game before, so it'd be far from the most drastic substitution we've seen for a non-existent train.

 

Can't speak for everyone of course, but I think that in these kinds of cases the amount of good gameplay should be prioritized over realism. From what I looked from Google maps, the Long Branch services run on the included part of the route for around 45 minutes before heading off. At least for myself this is very ideal service length, not too long or too short.

 

As said above me, you’ve already put electric locos on services which are ran by diesels, so why the sudden change of tune when it comes to Bi-Mode?

The diesel section for the Bayhead/NJCL services are miles beyond where the units in game will go anyway.

We aren’t talking about a BML situation where you’re looking at simulating Thameslink services with Southern 377’s. This is about resolving a dead timetable which has around 1/5th of the IRL timetable, with rolling stock that isn’t too far from reality.

 

I had high hopes. I'm not American so for me it's hard to judge how the US rail network is. Until now I was under the impression that railways is not a big deal in the US until I saw these trailers and realised I had a totally wrong impression. American trains did not stop evolving somewhere in the sixties. But from reading the comments in this topic this content will not improve on my initial impressions.

It's a shame because I'm starting to understand how interesting American railways could be. If American content is described by Americans as sub par to the European content it is very worrisome as I can't describe the European content as top notch content. I get that from an American perspective it looks top notch but it does not feel like it from a European perspective. I was under the assumption it was the American railways that sucked and not the company that made the sims about those railways. Stupid me again

 

See my posts above, but to summarize, the only services from NYP that prototypically need an ALP-45DP would be the services to Bay Head or Raritan/High Bridge. All other services (which constitutes the vast majority) out of NYP can use 46s and multilevels as far as I am aware.

 

You stuck an AI ACS64 on a none electrified section of track with wrong rolling stock to stimulate the lake shore limited on Boston Sprinter, you stuck a 612 on BRO which never ran on the line, we had a train with no panto on London Commuter on some services which ran (off board) under wires. We had a TGV on a British route (which for me is the worst by far) so surely you have sufficient feedback from these routes on if the community as a whole feels these sort of things are good or bad?

For me if you can stimulate a Amtrak Long Distance train with incorrect coaches and missing sleepers, bag cars and cafe cars then a all electric loco on a section of the NJCL line which is under the wires is far less of an issue.

 

Yes, to reiterate what most others are saying, I find using the included NJT stock to simulate NJCL services an acceptable solution via a vis striking the right balance between realism and gameplay. Thanks for inquiring.

 

Sticking the ALP46 on the NJCL services isn't really that offending, unlike the ATSF F7 on Cajon Pass.....

 

Ive said this before but given the subject has crept up again I'll repeat it here, I think the whole question over wrong trains/less trains on a timetable could easily be solved with a layer toggle.

Toggle on for maximum trains which are wrong/toggle off for pure realism. Then everyone would be less dissatisfied

 

I am just speculating, but could the DLC manager work to remove layers for those that do not want them to appear. Until we see it, we will not know is this is feasible or convenient.

 

Also, include the "wrong" locomotive for now as a subtitue, then if you ever get to recreating the correct locomotive (either for a loco add-on or another route) then you can simply swap it out.

From what others have said comparing the real NJT timetable to this one, this is ridiculously lacking. Wonder how the preview stream will feel like.

 

Worth noting that where Matt said they got ‘ripped apart’ for adding electrics to services where diesels ran, it was for doing this. It was not an innocent little sub as Matt made out in his reply.

Putting the ALP-46 on the NJCL services for the NEC section is very different.

 

Or for that matter, a German Intercity with no restaurant or cab car.

 

Or a British long distance express with no buffet or restaurant car...

Or a new UK route which is going to finish in the middle of nowhere.

Seriously though at this stage of TSW's life shouldn't we by now have some long distance Amtrak equipment, P42's and Superliner stock or at a pinch rework and relivery a F40 to do the business.

 

As long as we're on the topic of things that aren't quite realistic, I would like to point out that the doors between Amfleet cars were set up correctly way back in NEC:NY, but on Boston Sprinter, they aren't right. The big metal doors at the end of the cars (not the sliding ones) should be propped open permanently on cars that are coupled to each other and only closed on the ends of the train.

 

Not to mention that IIRC there have never been services added to a timetable after the fact.

 

No you can have a third ACS-64 and you will be happy with it.

 

Exactly this. It would please everyone in an instant.

 

Now now, this is the internet in 2023, no one is ever pleased fully.

 

I'm feeling a LITTLE better after seeing JD and Matt's replies. The LD Amtrak services are nice even with the wrong equipment, and hopefully those NJCL services can be added as well.

The number of driveable servicea seems ok, but there's still no definitive answer on AI-only services.

It does seem that the timetable is being held back by gen8- not totally sure why we're moving backwards in this regard, when other routes have had the full experience for gen9/pc??

 

That's true. But this feature would make the current ongoing discussion obsolete, I think.

 

The amount of NJT and Amtrak services are alright (at least in my opinion). What I don’t understand is LIRR and static freight.

Brighton Mainline got the 313, HST, tons of Southeastern services. No problems?

Southeastern High Speed got the TGV, ICE 3, and southern 377’s loaned to southeastern as AI. No problems?

All the German routes have tons of extra bits of special trains and AI, especially Kassel.

If all these other routes can get all these special services, I don’t understand why we can’t at least have some static CSX wagons scattered on the map and also some static LIRR trains parked at New York Penn to increase immersion. The fact you have no plans to revise the timetable is sad.
The LIRR trains don’t even have to move, just keep some in the platforms at Penn.

And also so far all you’ve addressed is the timetable. What about the British PIS? which after Boston and after Harlem many people complained about yet it’s still here with Trenton. The French TGV route got authentic PIS why can’t America get anything?

also what about the scenery? NEC NY and LIRR are both reaching 5-6 years old now, TSW has come a long way since then yet Trenton has everything from Newark to Sunnyside copy and pasted from one of TSW’s first routes. Sunnyside doesn’t even look like that today anymore, especially with Grand Central Access, and the NYP from the LIRR route isn’t good.

Routes like West Cornwall got delayed because of a crap timetable, the same should be done for this.
If anything, five Gen 9 some static LIRR trains at Penn and static CSX freight cars, Gen 8 should NOT hold back Gen 9.

 

Still the communication between players and DTG seems a bit off IMO; in this specific case:

What is an acceptable substitution between a loco/wagon already existed in the game, and a loco in real life. I think it's reasonable to say that (my personal opinion) if a loco is sold as a loco, it should fit perfectly into the route with the correct time settings, since it is the loco that's worth the price (F7 in CJP as an opposite example); If a loco comes with a route, MAYBE it is not so important that it subs other similar locos, at least temporarily before appropriate loco addon is introduced (baby bullet in peninsula corridor as an example) - i.e. electric subs for electric, diesel subs for diesel, but players need to find a common ground, just for the sake of communication and for DTG to make more rational decisions.

For AI services, the more the better, but players have different platforms and may need a bit more details from DTG to explain the huge performance differences between platforms to persuade players, if they want to use that reasoning to get out of the concerns and questions.

I think DTG based their decision at least partly on the result from the winter survey, as time length/realistic loco/timetable all appear in that survey and this route is the first route they made after new year. I'd think that feedback from players varied dramatically, and most importantly, whoever is satisfied with this timetable is rarely, if ever, going to voice out in the forum, but their feedback is in that survey. People who speak their voices are always those dissatisfied - understandable, but these people may not be the same from last route to this one.

 

I can only speak for Series X and PC, but i really don't have any issues on either platform with BML (other than the usual core issues).

But the whole point is that Gen 8 shouldn't be holding back the other platforms when DTG are able to have a different timetable for each.

What am i missing?

 

Issues on consoles should NOT impact PC players.
Even if it does cause significant performance issues, it’s still there in the timetable.

Just a few LIRR M7’s isn’t going to hurt the timetable.

 

I have BML with all layers on PC and XBOX X with no issues. Plus you can always remove layers if you want better performance

 

One extra type of train isn’t going to hurt performance that much surely? Forget the LIRR M3. At least just add the LIRR M7, just parked at a few platforms at Penn.

 

This is the funniest part when it comes to PIS screens. They made a custom one for LGV, a one of french route. We have never seen another french route since, yet they took the effort to make a pretty good french PIS screen for that one route. Or one of the old british routes where they made custom PIS screens out of chalkboards or something like that? Yet the US doesn't get one after almost 2 years and several US passenger route release and preservation crew updates. Why?

 

This is something that Matt and JD avoid answering, and I wonder why… there was feedback about it from Boston, and from Harlem. You’d think they’d listen to that feedback.

 

Ok, so since we've gotten some official comment from DTG (which is appreciated) here are my thoughts on this timetable.

1. Amtrak - seems pretty good here, nothing I can see to complain about. I didn't bust out an Amtrak schedule to compare but it seems like all of the expected NEC/Keystone/Acela services are there. And they've also included some trains (longer distance ones) which they don't actually have the proper rolling stock for, substituting existing stock (much like Lakeshore Limited on Boston Sprinter). Nothing to complain about with these services.

2. LIRR - completely missing. This one to me is a bit bizarre. LIRR would exist on this route at Penn Station and also I think would be visible from the Sunnyside Yard portion since they run that way. The correct stock all exists in the LIRR DLC. But they chose not to include this. It doesn't bother me personally a whole lot, but I see why some people are worked up about it and it is an odd decision. I can't think of another situation where DTG left out a bunch of services that would be on a route when they actually had stock available. Usually its because they don't have the stock and it wouldn't be reasonable to create an entire train just for AI purposes. But even then the trend lately has been to bend the rules to include trains using substitute stock (i.e the Nightjet trains on KWG, or even on this route itself some of the Amtrak long distance trains). Weird choice.

3. NJT - this is the one that would bug me most. Lots of services are included - but lots missing? I am not an NJT expert so I could be wrong but it seems like they included most of the trains which would exist from Penn to Trenton which we can control. But not ones which would branch off the NJCL or Raritan valley line? Even though the stock included (ALP46 and bilevel cars) would work fine for these services. This also seems bizarre to me. If the stock in game works, why not? Even the few services that would use ALP45s for the diesel portion way off map would work in game fine with ALP46s (the same route is going to use ACS64s on trains that IRL would be P42s so I don't think anyone would be bothered by a ALP46 where a 45 would be).

I don't think any of this is enough to write off the route. I am still buying it. But it does seem a bit bizarre and a step backwards to not include services that would be on the line IRL and where appropriate rolling stock exists in game. Even if they are AI services, those AI services filling routes is what makes the whole "world" part of train sim world great. The places people love like Hamburg station are full of AI trains that aren't controllable but still add to the atmosphere. Or UK routes where you see trains pass on sections of track you can't even get to as a player. All for immersion purposes. Boston also has AI trains for the MBTA lines other than Providence, even though they all just branch off pretty much right after the station. DTG obviously "gets it" because they put lots of work into that feeling for certain routes but on this one it seems like a decent amount has been left out. Not sure if it is due to technical issues (signals can't handle more traffic), performance issues like FPS, or lack of time/effort.

This is all meant as constructive input.

 

Quite dissapointed about the LIRR and CSX stuff not layering in at all. - Not even for PC & Gen 9. It would only be a small detail, but it‘s the small details that make Brighton Mainline what it is. Same for Kassel Würzburg. - I hope one day there may be a rethink.

 

Always more traffic is appreciated, whether it's ai or playable. Not everyone's going to be happy anyway and will be extremely harsh for having the wrong train run certain services. I'm all for extra services if the base timetable isn't busy. Who cares if other people say it's not realistic to use an all electric train to run the bimode services. I don't know my railroads and what run. At the end of the day, more traffic = better value and gameplay

 

This is definitely not a reason not to include them. Many examples have been mentioned of where this has been done to great benefit for "only" one station. Köln with IC services, all main stations on SKW, Bremen, etc. Besides, it is not only because of one station; it is a couple of miles to Sunnyside where this traffic makes an influence and especially in the Sunnyside area itself. So no, this reason is absolutely unacceptable. LIRR should've been in the game. You've gone the extra mile on other routes with layers you don't even have rolling stock (NJs, 612s on Bremen,...) for, and here with the EXACT rolling stock, you're like, "Nah." This is rushed. What's the rush for? Fiscal year?

With 82 services that are less than two tph in each direction, maybe three tph on rush hour and no in the night... doesn't sound like "many" to me tbh, but that's just my opinion.

 

The fact that they’re blaming performance for this is not good.

Forget using the LIRR M3, let’s say just the LIRR M7. Some that stay static within Penn Station, and a select few that run on a fictional timetable running in and out of Penn and past Sunnyside, should not affect performance. If ICE 3 and TGVs on SEHS is fine, a handful of M7’s should be perfectly alright.

The fact they’re even calling this a full timetable is a shame. If performance really is an issue, let gen 8 have this poor timetable and give gen 9 a full one

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but for some to try to make excuses for the lack of services. Again what would they had said if the BML just came out with just the Brighton services or Bremen with no other layers. SEHS with just some of the 395 services

 

Maybe Series S should get the Gen 8 build on certain routes, or is that not technically possible?

The only other non-performance related theory i have is that for some reason the LIRR stock isn't compatible with NY-Trenton for some technical reason (maybe the LIRR stock uses older code that needs to be updated to work with the signalling changes that have been implemented since Harlem, per the article?).

But, that would only apply to drivable services, presumably, since LIRR does exist in Scenarios, and therefore should at least work as AI in the timetable.

The whole thing is just kinda weird