Dovetail Games Bought By Focus Entertainment

It would depend on the type of route editor. If it used a common pool of stock assets built into the game then yes it could be downloaded via CC for example on consoles. Custom stuff, yeah that would be a PC only realm. However that should have still been an option. There are games out there that have open PC modding that don't make it to console. An example would be something like Farming Sim. Sure it has some mods on console, but many are restricted to PC only due to the expanded openness of that platform. Seems like it was just a design choice to either keep all platforms the same or to simply do away with a route editor to keep the $$ in house and with selected partners.

 

It would be to keep consistency (an attempt anyway) cross platform. DTG would make money from dependencies as they do with TSC

 

The addons might still be somewhat niche, but the sim as a whole has healthier numbers then Halo, MSFS' not niche by any stretch of the imagination at this point.

That said I can certainly think of other niche sims which are higher quality despite being niche, IL-2 comes to mind.

 

Er, no it doesn't. It doesn't change anything about official content.

 

I agree

there’s been a ton of speculation in this thread by folks saying this is great and others saying this is very bad.

personally I don’t put much stock into any of those opinions … those are guesses

DTG Matt was in this thread and suggested to us that we should treat this as the good thing that it is…. Or something like that.

clearly he thinks this is a good thing. Now his perspective is one I’d like to see or hear.

this is why I asked Matt to elaborate. Why is this a good thing Matt? I really think it would help to know what you think about this. At least as far as what can be discussed outside of the company of course. I don’t expect you to divulge proprietary info.

 

Well, he's hardly going to say anything negative about the takeover.

Actually, I think he's right. In my opinion change is almost always good. If Focus Entertainment can freshen things up and maybe slow things down so that route quality can increase, it will be a good thing for all stakeholders, especially us players.

Worst case scenario would be if nothing changes..

 

Well, I believe you're wrong.

 

Well, that can only be a belief, since none of us know what goes on behind the scenes at DTG.

 

Honestly one of the reasons I abandonded TSC was this, I buy a route on sale, but need to spend 4x the cost on enhancement packs for things I do not care for, like another entire route, just for some scenery assets or a freight wagon pack that I'm never going to use.

I get that people want ultra-realism, but for me, I just want to play a game to kill 45 minutes.
I'm actually glad there is no editor for TSW

 

my take in that regard would be that they (Any DTG Representative) would only refer to something positive if they have reason to believe it will be, I don’t think they (Any DTG Representative) would make comments on the forum if they thought it was negative.

 

A fair point.

 

Man, I missed all the "fun" on the weekend...

 

Official content wouldn't need the editor, and anything edited wouldn't be published on the official channels. Not sure you're making a valid point here...

 

The problem is the bugs are discovered to late. If you find them earlier, it is much easer and cheaper to fix them. DTG has a fundamental problem in its organization. A far to big QA team, trying to fix what the developers should have done correct. Developers should be responsible for testing and fixing their own bugs right away.

 

In a perfect world this would be the case, and not trying to make excuses here but the way that DTG do development (from their various streams and inputs on the forum) is they have people doing the scenery, people laying track, people laying signals, people making timetables and people making trains... Only when all those things come together can testing really begin given the amount of interactions they have
There will be things that can be tested and scrutinised beforehand, but the interactions won't be known until everything's in place, and given how DTG schedule things they don't leave much wiggle room

 

I think that’s right. The issue I have is with the guy or girl that, for example, makes the loco such that rain doesn’t land on the windscreen. That should be done correctly first time, 100% of the time. No excuses. For something like that not only be done wrong but then not fixed before the thing makes it out to release is not good enough. The same applies to the environmental lighting up time, instrument light switches not working and so on.

It’s not realistic to expect a game to ship without bugs, but the above examples are not bugs. They’re examples of sloppiness, of people not doing their jobs properly, are they not? When things like this slip the net it means someone else has to go back and do it right, something that is entirely avoidable and is pointless man-hours spent fixing rather than creating. Like it or not, the person not doing it right in the first place has to take responsibility for their work, but responsibility also has to fall at the feet of the person who is in overall control of this.

In most ‘professions’, lessons would be learnt from obvious errors and procedures put in place to prevent them happening again. There is also a lot of ‘peer review’, and both of these are constant processes. That sort of culture doesn’t seem to exist where this game is concerned, and to assume people will keep stumping up £30 for a completely variable quality product is a brave standpoint to take, because everyone has their own redline where they will eventually realise they’re being treated like mugs.

 

Given we have scenario editor and routes where rain can happen (even test track) I agree

 

TSC can be played without buying lots of addons also. An editor gives options. It also gives a chance for routes to be improved upon or have an era change. Right now we are locked out of the TSW editors and the list of issues for some recent releases is large leading to pressure on dev teams to go and fix things which often does not happen or takes months and years in some cases. I have no issue with anyone being happy with TSW in it current condition but many are not.

 

Exactly, so you lose nothing from there being an editor.

 

Many games have issues on release, but it seems that TSW has more than most. The difference with better development teams (and publishers) is that they will often be working on new fix builds before the release date, even though it's too late for those fixes to get into the release master, but an initial post-launch patch will already be in the works. Many console games now have a patch waiting to download on release day to fix many known issues that couldn't be ironed out of the release master. And the devs will still be working on more difficult issues for a subsequent patch, and then start working on anything they missed based on feedback.

It's also fairly uncommon, in my mind, to find a fix patch breaking something else significantly, because seeing as you're working on the patch to fix an issue(s), and the patch and fixes are smaller and more confined in scope than the initial release, you can normally test more thoroughly and ensure that nothing adverse is happening before you release the patch (notwithstanding unknowns specific to end users' individual hardware and software interactions). And you don't (or shouldn't) have the same pressure of a launch date that must be met; you can delay the patch until it's working well; you don't have to give a release date for the patch.

But it seems DTG work in a way that certainly gives players the impression they don't actually care about the product. At least, the publisher side of DTG, not necessarily the devs doing the work. And that's because, not that they don't do patches and fixes at all, but they don't seem to fix major issues at all half the time. SOS should be working properly by now, and it definitely shouldn't have ended up worse on TSW3. Save game shouldn't have taken 6+ years to even bother looking at! And to still be like a beta test option... There should be significant signs of optimisation now, too.

There should be progress all the time where progress is needed. Nothing should ever be completely abandoned the way too many problems seem to be. You sold a game/route and in doing so made a tacit promise to ensure at least all scenarios are completable, everything is fully functional, if not now then soon.

That's why I hope Focus Entertainment will bring a new method, more in line with others in the business, that sees easier fixes getting patched quickly, and no longer having issues abandoned entirely. Hopefully they provide the investment to enable that.

 

The reason Train Simulator has this whole "addons/mods on top of addons/mods" problem isn't because it has a editor. There's two major reasons which were far more critical that resulted in this fundamentally flawed structure.

1: The game's made in frankly dumb way which results in needing tons of content if you want realistic scenarios. If I want to play a detailed TS scenario with a million different AI trains I need all million to play it. Yes I could modify it with TS tools, but that doesn't change the fact it's kind of stupid that this has to be done in the first place. In comparison you don't have this same issue in MSFS, if I want to play multiplayer and someone has a different aircraft it just subs in a generic and we can play together, nothing else needed. The combat flight simulators take a similar but slightly different approach, as they actually allow you to fight against the ai versions of aircraft you don't own, instead of subbing in with generics. Either approach would to wonders for expanding the accessibility for TS.

1.5: I'm not considering this a entirely new point, more so just a side note to build off the previous one. But if DTG stopped swapping out routes on a constant basis would also really help for freeware developers. A big problem with TSC is pretty much no matter what you use there's nothing you can use which everyone has. In MSFS there's certain assets you know everyone has, for example the Asobo A320. So you can use systems from that aircraft, and know that you don't to worry about players lacking said aircraft. This means freeware such as the FBW A320 & A330neo can act as immediate and free access points to improve the sim for players who want more. The fact DTG feel the need to keep swapping out the routes really messed with this part of the eco system in TSC.

2: A part of the reason developers like AP came to prominence in the first place is because frankly DTG's content has always been subpar. Physics were off most of the time, system fidelity basic, and sound recordings would often be painfully mediocre. The reason AP's products do well is because frankly they bring those products up to the standard they should've been at without enhancements in the first place. DTG's faults are why we have so many enhancement packs, they could stop 90% of that by just making better products. And the remaining 10% that would still exist would be in lower demand, as the higher quality would drive more people to stick with them in their default state.

At worst the editor is contributing factor, but I think it's needlessly demeaning to say that much of it.

 

People want authenticity. If they didn't care, they could just "sub in" a random class 47 for anything they don't have.

Presumably someone puts these in using an editor or similar creation function?

I think you're forgetting that a lot of the "default assets" are in a pack which you get bundled with loads of routes for free...
Asset pack listing on steam

And add in loads of reskins and enhancements which DTG would not...
I think you're underplaying what AP do bring, whilst leaving out that they're one of the worst offenders for abandoning content, orphaning their own scenarios and ensuring you need their whole back catalogue to play things as authored

And don't forget the structure of TSC was there before DTG took it over. Yes they could have rebuilt it from scratch in a different engine and made things slightly different, but that doesn't always give the intended result and people still make mods for them where they can...
oh, wait, they did that

 

Personally I think it's great news. Focus are a considerably more streetwise when it comes to understanding the console market and that can only be a good thing when determining how to make a niche product more appealing to a mainstream audience. Although I've kind of learned to live without TSW for almost a year now (I don't even purchase anything when it's on sale) I am genuinely looking forward to seeing what the future holds for the game now that it's presumably going to get it's much needed reset (and dead wood clearout) and you never know, there might still be hope for a decent game after all.

£15m though! Hardly anything in today's day and age, so it does kind of make you wonder how close to the edge DTG actually were.

 

Regardless of all the disrespectful mayhem that went on in this thread, very sad to hear that Adam has left Dovetail Games! He was a huge part of the preservation crew and roadmap livestreams from back when I joined the TSW community in early 2021 all the way to late 2022. You could always sense his motivation and dedication. I remember them talking about bringing Adam back to the Roadmap streams a while ago, but now we know why that didn’t end up happening. Sad we didn’t even get to say goodbye Thanks for everything, Adam!!

 

yes a reset is needed. TSW needs to be put in good working order, they kept releasing more content before they fixed the last broken content eventually the whole thing will come crashing down as you would simply have more and more bugs to fix with no ending in sight. And then people stop buying on launch or until the sales and you can see it would give a massive hit to income.

I think DTG are highly reliant on new dlc releasing all the time its now the achilles heel of dtg, they need the money coming in but the more that is released broken reduces the amount they can get. They either fix TSW2/3 or it will just die. I want it to be a success but it needs work to do so!

 

I'll say the radio silence this week is a little concerning.

There was originally a stream scheduled for today, but it seems to have been cancelled.

So, nothing on the horizon til next roadmap? Or is that even still going to be happening monthly?

 

Legit, most of the stuff going doesn't bother me too much, but Adam leaving so suddenly when he's such a long standing member kind of does.

 

I suspect DTG are in a mess internally and likely to be going through redundancies which is what I suspect "may" have happened to Sam and Adam. Obviously I am only guessing but it makes you wonder they went around the time of the big changes

 

I highly doubt they’re making redundancies, particularly there. Have a look at the website and there a lot of people in roles that are not directly contributing to the production of simulation software. It really seems an awful lot for a company the size of DTG. If they were going to start swinging an axe (which I highly highly doubt anyway) you’d wouldn’t have thought it would be at experienced devs they can ill afford to lose.

It’s all just guess work anyway, we’ll never know why they’ve left and it’s really none of our business unless the people involved chose to make it public. It’s just a shame they’ve gone to be honest.

 

its possible they fell out with management ? but its all guesses, and it would not surprise me if they got rid of people who said no that content is not ready for release !

 

Again, speculating on confidential decisions and discussions between management and individual employees is going to end up with this thread getting purged again or even locked. Don't think anyone posting here would want their employer announcing on a public forum why they were let go or shuffled to a different department.

 

Agreed, it’s totally pointless and ultimately nobody’s business but theirs.

 

yes that's a fair point.

 

Sry, but the assumption or the belief that under Focus all errors of all tracks / vehicles of TSW2/3 will be fixed or bugs will be tackled on a large scale will lead nowhere.

It's more likely that there will be new routes that may be of better quality or a whole new game.

The radio silence here in the forum and on the part of DTG in general "speaks volumes" and I think they are in chaos right now.

 

in an ideal world the problems would be fixed but I do think they may simply go for a TSW4 to start fresh

 

We‘ll see what happens, maybe there will be a massive fix marathon in summer, maybe with the summer release?

 

Absolutely. I really find such gossip distasteful. But many people on the forum obviously can't help themselves.

These are real people with families, friends, mortgages etc. It's really none of our business what goes on in their private lives, even those who put on a public hat for the community.

 

Let's not attribute people leaving for things not happening/being released or the game going downhill. People leave all the time after working in the same industry for a while.

 

I hope not. They really don't need a new product number on the end to fix its issues, and doing so, in my view, would be an insult to the users who've already paid for a high quality, fully working product they haven't actually got yet.

I'd like to see a major update to TSW3 a few years before a "new game" is even whispered of. They can do a heck of a lot via a free patch, and ditch the smoke and mirrors.

 

I do not talk about a perfect world, but about teams working according to professional best practices, which I have seen quite a lot. The DTG style of development is proven to be ineffective (see DTG as an example) and is outdated at least 10-15 years.

 

I'm very clearly critical of DTG, myself. But the post you're replying to essentially lays out how every development studio works, with different programmers (coders) and other team members working on their specific sections, then everyone bringing it all together by uploading to build servers that stitch the bits together intelligently. That isn't outdated. Only small indie devs (1- or 2-man teams, for example) will wear multiple hats simply out of necessity.

DTG's problems potentially lie in skillset, to begin with, and definitely in how they handle everything post-release. Not in individuals working on separate parts. There's nothing drastically wrong with having issues in a release build, either, it's how they rectify them afterwards (or never, which is their worst fault).

 

I knew today wouldn’t be a stream about the acquisition of DTG, but rather a stream about peak forest!

 

Probably cuz the acquisition is still new and they don't have 1hr+ of content to talk about other than they are happy for the acquisition and that new stuff is coming out and wouldn't be able to answer certain questions since it's still new.

 

I don't think it IS outdated. I know companies who work in the same way as DTG with separate technicians working on separate parts of the project which come together well down the chain of development and then everything gets tested together

I think the main problem which we encounter in DTG (and third party) output is that NEW development doesn't stop in a timely fashion, allowing for testing and tweaking.
What I mean by that is that they keep adding and adding and adding and this messes things up for the things which used to work. I can assume, for example, that the drivers window wiper on the 158 did work, until someone decided to put the reflection on which changed the characteristics of the glass, meaning it wouldn't wipe properly
That's an assumption, but I think close enough to the mark.
Had someone not had a brainwave and thought "Hey, wouldn't there be some reflection on that window?" it wouldn't have happened

So maybe the way DTG work is possibly ineffective in publishing a completed project, but I don't think it's because of compartmentalised development in the components of a project, but that development once things start getting brought together is allowed to continue on a wishlist basis, rather than a testing / bugfixing one. This seems to me why we see a lot of "we didn't have time to fix it"

 

Exactly. As per my own response to this above.

I can tell you for sure that compartmentalised development is the way of the industry. It's completely normal, and necessary.

There's a huge AAA title in development right now, being done by multiple development studios for one big publisher. An individual person couldn't possibly work on networking, tools, UI, sound design, AI, animations, etc... Some things are outside of a person's expertise, and basically their brain would melt trying to get a handle on so many different things at once, anyway.

The bits don't just come together way down the line, either. They will be debugging their own sections of code as they go and compiling into complete builds to test every day, often multiple times a day, and tracing whose section of code might have broken what.

 

I think this is the point at which DTG may be falling down, and again I think it's likely because people are making late stage changes to fundamental things even if outside of the core brief

 

Unfortunately it happens that teams will be working on the code even on the day it's due to be submitted for the release window, and something unexpected breaks but they're out of time. As I said elsewhere, that's why you get release-day patches or patches sooner than later after launch (for most other games), because they're already working on fixes while the release build is with the publisher.

 

Quite probably, but in this instance we know that this isn't working for DTG and others, so looking to reel back a bit might be warranted. Too many post-dev issues (or never devved but not picked up) getting out to the public.
The commentor that started this chain is right in that it definitely DOESN'T work for the current setup (or setup to this point) within DTG

 

I had to write a Python program for my physics degree, it wasn't until it was peer reviewed by another student, who pointed out a pretty glaring issue, that I realised I'd made a stupid error, and the program had already been submitted for my assessment.

The program worked fine for me, because I wrote it and I knew what to input and when, but I was completely blind to this issue until someone who hadn't written the program tried to use it, I wasn't trying to half ass it, or be lazy, but because I'd missed it, I got marked down accordingly.

I guess what I am trying to say is, people make stupid, glaring mistakes all the time, it's not because they are lazy or stupid, it's just because you get so focused with what you are doing when you are under pressure to get things done that its very easy to miss.

 

Exactly.

 

Yes. There's an issue with their way of working, especially in the area of post-launch support where they just abandon issues, but it isn't the compartmentalised approach to development at fault or being outdated, which it really isn't.