We know, for example, that Brighton Main Line does not have rush hour passengers as TSW4 would crash. Brighton Main Line, has multiple, inaccessible / non-visible areas, e.g. Cliftonville / Hove tunnels leading to the West Coastway etc. The same goes for BCC (e.g. Soho terminal); the NE-bound branch (either to Immensee or Zurich) just north of Luzern; and (possibly) ALL other TSW4 compatible routes. Although portals will undoubtably exist on these spurs to add or remove AI traffic, could both TSW4 stability and performance be improved by removing these redundant areas, especially if the inaccessible content cannot be seen, making routes less memory intensive. With increasing numbers of route / loco / gameplay pack add-ons (currently 89 when counting Arosa Aggregates), this significantly shorten loading times as well as stability and performance. Portals could either remain or moved closer to the main route. Backups of the "full" route could always be made IF the route were ever to be extended. Past history has shown us that, however, that extensions, are highly unlikely, unless done during a developer's free time (e.g. adding the Meissen branch to Dresden-Riesa; although a substantial chunk of the S2 Flughafen / Airport branch remains "unfinished", and may affect performance as well as increasing HDD space). Sadly, although it is extremely unlikely that "old" routes would ever be trimmed (as this may affect "new" route development), it would make perfect sense for "new" routes to be released with no inaccessible areas.
I don't think it would have a huge impact on performance because you're still using up memory on the drivable areas with all the traffic (ai+playable) and assets. Things are loaded into memory even if not visible in case they spawn back in. Removing all non accessible in all old routes might actually detract from the gameplay depending on the route. It's like removing all the branch lines used for ai on Boston Providence so track would be missing entirely or they just disappear at Boston. There's also the freight line running under harlem. Or the kassel wurzburg line on main spessart bahn even though it has no traffic, it's still part of the route and removing that bridge or whatever entirely wouldn't be realistic. Some tracks are necessary so it feels correct and right. In some cases, the extra track is built to futureproof in case a loco dlc gets released for it. It's easier to build it and make it inaccessible and to later open it up rather than building the whole thing with a loco dlc.
I know that Matt has mentioned several times in streams that rolling stock (e.g. DB BR 101) is memory intensive, which can be an issue on routes with different locos. What's never really been addressed is how route assets (e.g. signals, houses, tracks, tunnels etc.) affect performance and stability. My OP never suggested removing ALL branch lines. It suggested removing inaccessible content that can't be viewed directly from the route (without resulting to mods etc.). Visible branches such as the Cheshire Line Committee between Speke and Allerton on SOS would be retained. WonterRail 's excellent work PC - Hidden Tsw: The Tracks That You Don't See | Dovetail Games Forums and What Lies Beyond The Invisible Walls Of London Commuter | Dovetail Games Forums shows just how prevalent these hidden areas are. The classic example being Track 3 on Sherman Hill, which MUST be affecting performance even though it's inaccessible. Removing them would help not just HDD space, but also loading times, performance and stability.
Trackwork on its own will not affect performance. Scenery only really affects performance when it is either in the area or in sight. The cut Track 3 will therefore have absolutely no impact on performance under any circumstances.
Do not, under any circumstances. Remove content from the game because consoles are struggling with memory. TSW4 does not need "trimming", it runs perfectly fine on PC. It needs optimization.
I recall there was an issue where the third rail had collision added by mistake and that added a ton of issues to performance. I think it was BML but I can't quite remember, so it is not necessarily zero effect. Also on BML there were certainly some unoptimised assets that caused huge slowdowns everytime they were on-screen. If you had your back to them the FPS went up about 30!
I don’t worry at all about rush hour passengers or not, passengers are broke currently regardless, unless that gets fixed first it will make next to no difference if they got added in.
I'm unsure what is meant. Is PS4 completely missing passengers? Because at Clapham Junction I see them as pictured.
They're not present on all routes or at all stations. One picture of passengers standing at a platform on one route isn't evidence they exist everywhere.
The 'Rush Hour' passengers is what DTG call routes with increased passenger numbers. London to Brighton never had them added as they couldn't get it to work. It was promised that they'd add them but it has been several years now, so like most other DTG promises it's a lost cause waiting for it to happen.
