Enough Is Enough!!! The Ongoing Saga!!! It's Almost The 3 Year Anniversary

What you are doing here is a "meta discussion", basically commenting on forum members that discuss opinions about the game.

You're commenting on the posters that are commenting on DTG.

Stuff like that usually doesn't end up well, just let people vent their frustration. As DTG do let us. The reasons are well explained in here. Almost each DLC comes up with a list of obvious bugs discovered within a very short playing time, and patches always break something people have spent their money on. People in here want to improve the game.

So while your opinion is as valid as everone else's, it's basically off topic.

 

I'd say it's definitely a lack of time, or funding holding back route creation yeah. Quite a few routes are held back by weird omissions (ECML not going to york for example). Which Is definitely not down to the devs being lazy, it'll be down to time or financial constraints imposed from above.

 

Using the word lazy is being lazy in itself and shows a complete lack of thought or candour. When I see the word lazy I feel it negates the rest of their argument.

 

Peak Forest's signalling problems extend beyond the dispatcher...

 

Not purchased that one yet, but not surprised. 3rd Generation train sim should be be able to route trains by itself. That's with 7 years in
...

 

Not to mention it's the height of hypocrisy! A warning to stop playing or discussing this game or we will do ourselves "damage" - as many trips around the sun as I've had, I'll take my chances O Great Online Guru.

 

Not sure how I feel about amusing you; however it's not really my purpose here. Also, I'll play what games I want and discuss them on a Forum as I want. Thanks!

 

To tarnish them all with the "Lazy" brush is unfair.

However, I'm sure that there are some "lazy" ones amongst them. Anyone who is of working age that has spent any time in any form of employment will no doubt have encountered a work colleague who was "lazy". Some people will do just enough to get by and sometimes it's not that easy to root them out, but most organisations will have at least one.

I would say that there are aspects of TSW which are sloppy and lack care, be that accidental or intentional and it seems particularly bad in the QA side of things. Some things, such as a particular button being the wrong shade of a particular colour are purely down to the users personal interpretations.

However, other things are as obvious to a blind man in a dark alley and should never get through. This is where, in my opinion DTG are letting themselves down and making those that do purchase things early little more than beta testers who are paying for the privilege of being so. The actual QA team most likely don't have to pay for things and will possibly see some fixes on the copies they get.

The paying beta testers just have to wait for the much talked about but rarely seen release slot. Especially on older content!

 

I'm not just referring to routing, I'm referring to how TSW's implementation of Absolute Block is broken at the aspect level and impossible to drive HUDless.

 

This is the default carriage lighting on the Class 700 and either it or the passengers (or both) are very clearly not set up at all correctly.



So what do we label this as? Is it lazy? Is it incompetent, careless, rushed or a combination of all of the above? All we know as customers is that it is is treating us like absolute mugs. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade, it really is that simple. A dev (not management) did this, and they did a very very bad job indeed.

It doesn't matter how good the rest of it is, this is appalling. What is worse is that this is still like this now and if anything is worse in TSW4 than it was in TSW3. It is still, just like every other piece of content for this game, being sold at full price.

This is why people have issues with Dovetail Games. TSW is so often almost there, but is too readily let down time and time again by rushed or shoddy work.

 

Let me guess, distant off Section on or suchlike. Totally wrong for AB.

 

The lighting is OK.

It's no passengers at all that's bugging me.

 

The passengers are like silhouettes cut out of the fabric of reality. I'd say this doesn't look okay to me.

 

Are you serious?! Do you own the 700? The lighting is far from ok. Look at the passengers…

 

There is also the time period problem. MSB is today a vintage route; since 2017 the Spessart Rampe is gone and Heigenbrücken station closed, bypassed by a new tunnel.

 

While coach interiors are a problem, I don't think it's an example that demonstrates your point, because this was a conscious decision: interiors have no shadows. This is deliberate, because including them would destroy framerate. Whether the policy is good or bad is another question, that does not go to "laziness."

 

It's not that. Look at the 700, then look at the Just Trains Pacer. It's to do with the type of light used in the first place, the way it's set up and then the way the NPCs themselves are set up. It's very noticeable that the NPCs on BPO do not have glowing hair. That is the difference between a dev who knows what he or she is doing, and one that doesn't.

The same applies to the MK3 coaches on MML. Pre-update they were an abomination. Post update they are correct.

 

Yeah, it's from improperly setup materials/shaders.

 

Here's the proof;

 

Yes, I am.

Because there are never any passengers on the 700.

 

Like I said to JetWash, I'm more concerned that there are no passengers on the 700. It feels empty compared to other trains.

 

I agree with the point above that the word lazy is incorrect in terms of not everyone is lazy, but some clearly are. It is the same in any organisation, there are a few bad apples trying to do the least they can get away with while taking a paycheck. These people leech off the others and generally drag the place down. In real-life it is getting harder to get rid of these people, the only way is to be as thorough as possible in the recruitment phase and not let them in to start with.

We see several DTG staff who regularly go above and beyond, who put in their own time on their own projects and make a huge difference to the game, these people are being let down by the kind of items highlighted above which should never have seen the light of day not even to beta testers, they should never have been put forward as candidate builds even. Hopefully the culture on the dev floor of DTG will be able to rise above the crunch time, get it out to meet the deadline culture and there will be more and more solid devs with a love of trains and pride in their work who outnumber those who will come and go quickly leaving not much behind them.

I also hope that we see more third parties who are able to work again outside the pressure of the DTG paymasters and are able to put much love and time into their work such as JT with the Blackpool route. I am hopeful that Skyhook can get to this level, not so much with Rivet, but still there is always some hope. ATS should be interesting too.

 

Wow - you must be a DTG employee yourself to be so intimate with the work habits of all the individuals in the organization -- Who are the bad apples in this case -- seems like you should have a job in HR with your insight.

Sorry - usually ignore such statements, but I found this one to be so arrogant I could not do so.

 

Try reading a bit better, sure I can't tell you who they are in DTG, but I can tell you who they are in my organisation.

 

Glad you have that initimate knowledge like I stated ... But I doubt you really do so -- anyway == have a great day

 

Forgive me, but I would say your post comes across as quite arrogant.

How do you explain that single issue with the 700 lighting (which is one out of the many) I mentioned above? If it’s not what some people are characterising it as I’m intrigued, what is it in your opinion? I personally don’t think that one is laziness, I think it’s incompetence. Perhaps maybe complacency or carelessness, I don’t know. If it’s not those things then what is it? I hope we can all agree however that it is a long way short of good enough.

Not only should that never have been done like that in the first place (long before this point there should be a single, tried, tested, standardised and correct method of setting these things up) but it should have been caught and rectified before it ever got as far as the beta stage. It’s even more ridiculous that not only did it pass beta but it was then released like this the best part of 6 months ago and remains in this state today.

 

But it is lazy. The bugs that have remained prevalent throughout the release of renamed TSWs is due to laziness. The lack of features is down to laziness. Why do we still not have GSMR functionality . If AP can do it for TSC then it can surely be done in TSW

 

They could use light baking for interior shadows and it would have pretty much zero performance cost. But they choose not to, because...? For the more well made locomotive cabs they do use it, interestingly.

And funnily enough, I remember we had a talk about this once in a stream with Matt, where he explained that the lack of light baking (especially under seats) in passenger cars is because the seats are not part of the car model, but are separate models (so you just need one seat model that you can render several times for all seats). This if course makes sense, but then the idea came that invisible placeholder objects could be used for light baking to darken the area under the seats. This was years ago, yet we still don't have proper light baking in passenger cars.

 

TSW5?????????????, you are very optimistic choom, i bet they will implement it when they release TSW 43 in in 2026

 

I’ll agree with you on world expansion, TSW needs more “world” in the world. Would love to see some Asian routes.

 

Again, "world" in this sense doesn't mean explore the planet.

 

The arrogance in these paragraphs is amazing.

 

Are we done soon with this thread?

 

Didn’t say it did. Said it could use a little more of it.I’m playing the game regardless of where it goes. Just saying I could do with a route from Japan or such is all.

 

I know, but some seem to think otherwise.

A run with the Shinkansen would be cool.

 

Tsc and tsw are 2 different games. It's a different method of coding and implementation. Just because one has it doesn't mean the other one will have it

 

So cool.

 

But, as I clearly said, people are commenting on the motives and motivations of DTG, its parent company and its employees, which is no different from what you've accused me of, i.e. it's 'meta'. People are also free and easy in expressing their opinions on why DTG have done what they've done and what they need to do to fix it, which is, at best, mostly guess work and, again, it's 'meta'. If people stuck to their gripes then, fair enough, you have a point, but they don't, so I (also) have a point.

 

To Page 60!

 

I don't think it currently locks up because of the Dispatcher. Something else is at play because the TSW Dispatcher can sort itself out. I think timetable mode worked properly before the update.

 

The vectron is very good. Too bad with the entire substitution mess the fun is gone. I stoped playing all content except blackpool branches. Either because mods dont work or the substitution is broken. (Or both)

 

But TSC shouldnt be more realistic than TSW.

 

No one said it is.

But it still needs to be coded in and made sure it doesn't break anything.

 

Hopefully this will be taken in good spirits

 

I been here for quite some time for around 3-4 years so i have seen everything

 

I've been here less than a year and could probably write a psychology paper based on this thread alone.

 

p. 60 by New Year's Day?

 

On paper, it shouldn't. In theory TSW from its inception would have been designed and developed with the experience and lessons learnt from the development of Train Simulator. In some cases this was done. The PIS displays in TSW work based on some sort of route-based setup and allows for seemingly universal functionality. It is highly impressive when implemented correctly. This feature is just not possible in Train Simulator. SimuGraph is also an improved way of calculating vehicle physics, making things that in TS would need advanced and proprietary scripting simple and relatively easy to do.

However, there are certain things that should have been done better. The map not having tags on it is a fundamental flaw with the way the game is coded. When the game was in beta it was excusable, but now it's not even on the table, which is inexcusable. The biggest problem though is that the same setup for DLC was used as in TS, which has created gigabytes' worth of duplicate assets and some trains with many duplicate variants, each with their own features and bugs. If I was in charge of designing the DLC system, assets would be part of packs that are downloaded separately to routes. The asset 'House 1' that is used in Route 1 would be used in Route 2 as well, rather than both routes having their own House 1. Rail Simulator and early versions of Train Simulator did this correctly, but because of the way that game loads data, many assets that are not used on a route would be loaded. Therefore, each route would have an index of assets needed for it to function correctly. Only those assets would be loaded, and nothing else. Similarly, the BR185 has a bunch of different variations. Really there should be just one in the whole game, which is updated as new features are developed. This means all routes that use the BR185 will have no differences when it comes to features. Loco DLC in both games generally works like this except when trains included in routes become their own DLC or vice versa, or if there are multiple loco DLCs with the same train. The Class 52 in both games has two versions available, and in TSW one is clearly superior to the other. It should not have been that way.

It's also worth pointing out that in both games human error, corporate idiocy and a lack of care and attention all play a part in messing things up. There are trains which are more realistic in Train Simulator, and routes that look better in it too. That isn't because of Train Simulator being a universally better game, but because of the developer who is making the content. Just Trains and TSG prove that TSW itself isn't always the problem.

 

The last sentence explains it well. A lot of us have seen the potential TSW has and TSG and JT have exploited that properly. DTG sometimes produce content that feels like its phoned in. JTs route gave me a little more time in TSW than I would have had without it but ultimately even that route falls down due to the poor signalling and dispatching. Also some AC locos would set the scene better at Preston something that we lack severely.

Ultimately after 7 years where does TSW go? Minor improvements claimed year after year which break older content, editors appear but will take a long time for content to be produced for. A policy of privatisation or steam only from DTG for UK releases. By now in the history of Train Sim a new platform has been in the works or about to be.

One common theme is that many are either bored, frustrated or very annoyed that nothing seems to change or in some cases go backwards.