With DTG it's always worth looking at the answers they don't give more than the answers they do give - when they avoid questions it always says more than any of their corporate fluff can.
What you really need, is a third-party like Train Sim Germany to try their hand at a steam locomotives, say, something like a DB BR93. It would bring some quality modelling and maybe give DTG the kick up the backside it needs. In reality, we are probably going to get somebody like Rivet Games, who see the demand for steam locomotives, and rush to release another broken dumpster fire to cash-in.
As others have pointed out, it makes no logical sense for DTG, with all their resources and technical experience, to abandon steam traction and then expect some 3rd party with one, two or three part timers with little or no technical experience in UE to take on a job DTG have thrown up their hands and given up on.? And then to suggest or imply that there are dozens of anonymous, nascent devs just waiting in the wings for this opportunity. It beggars belief.
I think Alex just says what the developers say. He probably doesn't have more info or not allowed to say certain things. There's only so much he can say
Unless you work for DTG you have no way of knowing that, neither do I. However, in any normal organisation someone who is an executive isn't just managing things day-to-day, they are making long-term decisions of considerable importance. Even if they are overruled by the MD, they will almost certainly have contributed to the discussion and been asked for their advice. I think Matt P is implicated in the decision to stop development of steam. How do you know he didn't recommend it's discontinuation? I can easily imagine a conversation like this, as I see them all the time. DTG MD: "OK, Matt, how do you think your development team can be best used?." Matt P: "Stop development of steam. It's going to take too much effort to get it to work properly and as we can all see from the sales figures it's not our best product line." DTG MD "Matt, that's helpful advice, agreed."
Like others I have been careful not to single out Matt as I know he is a great guy and probably under a great deal of pressure (as obvious from the stream), but some of the finger must inevitably point in his direction. We don’t know for sure what the remit of the EP exactly entails, but with title comes a certain amount of power and responsibility, to misquote an old Chinese product. Ultimately he is the guy who has to do the kicking, whether the bean counters above who control the budgets or the recalcitrant workforce underneath who need calling in for tea and biscuits then told to get on and sort it.
Sound sampled from one of those old Mamod traction engines… Ah fond memories of the smell of burnt fingers and methylated spirits!
Ah, the 70's really was the decade of dangerous toys. When else would you give a hot pressure vessel and live steam to a child to play with!
My other favourite, sort of still on topic for steam, was those Triang Hornby locos with the smoke generator in the chimney. If I ran out of the special “seuthe” liquid, I think it was called, used to dump 3 in 1 oil instead which filled the room with a blue haze and lucky not to set the whole thing on fire.
I don't see how a third party can do it better. DTG's mesh modelling, texturing and animations are fine - it's the underlying physics modules, the lack of the promised fire/boiler management and the broken things like AI sound. All of those feel like "internal" problems to me, which is why I've not wasted any more time on getting the Terriers into TSW - as I said before, you don't build your house on sand.
I'd say it's a pretty good idea of what happens. Usually is the case in any business that there's always someone higher up that makes these sort of decisions based on what they think will make them most money. Even in my line of work, the bosses make these decisions. But I don't think it's fair to pin it on one person. Why should Matt be singled out when development of something in TSW is stopped, not like its his sole responsibility as I would imagine others in the same or similar positions are involved.
Very interesting to follow the discussion about Steam. I think you shouldn't always interpret things in such a negative way. Alex and Matt also take some pressure off the boiler if they don't spoil or announce something. This may have something to do with the fact that DTG, as a first party, is not currently developing any projects of this kind and that the steam physics currently remain as they are. It was also indicated that 3rd parties are interested in Steam and DTG wants to provide them with all the necessary support. In other words, that doesn't mean that steam is dead in TSW. In addition, a steam locomotive is much more complex and elaborate than a modern railcar. I wouldn't go too much into the qualities of 3rd parties either, as many new developers still have a learning curve. But in the end it can also pay off because things can be implemented that DTG doesn't have on its radar and that will enrich the TSW railway world. I think this thread also shows that the desire for Steam still exists, as it is discussed very passionately. Those who don't want to have a steam locomotive don't have to drive one. But the history of the railway began with steam and steam is possible in TSW!
SoS is broken - it's not being fixed. PF is broken - it's not being fixed. The underlying steam sim is broken - it's not being fixed. The promised steam features are still missing - they're not going to be added. But let's imagine it all in the hands of the magical 3rd party fairies (despite myself, JT and others already deciding "no way in the current state") and pretend it's all buttercups and sunshine. Sorry, but based on DTG's history and recent actions your response is incredibly naive. I suggest you read this thread (at least the last 3 pages) to get a grip on the reality of the situation.
Its frustrating they've had all of these people create good steam content for TSC but they dont even want to work with them to try and get it working in TSW and create that base for themselves or 3rd parties to run wild with it. Because they took so long to "Get it right" for SOS release but it was so massively not right
I don't think it is right to single anyone out. None of us knows the internal processes at DTG and before you know it one comment on here becomes an internet wide comment. "So and so stopped the development of steam, I read it on the forums". This gets spread based on a total supposition without any factual evidence. There is probably only so much Alex can say so it is not fair to have a go at him. I am as frustrated as everyone else is on this thread, more so than many I suspect, but pointing the finger will not achieve anything and likely do more harm.
You’re totally right mate! Rather than point at who’s to blame, we should continue focusing on the main point of this thread before it completely derails. If this thread degenerates into name calling and targeting individual staff members of DTG, any constructive discussion that we’ve been having here will lose its meaning. Stick to what we know right now, let’s keep voicing our concerns and continue letting DTG know that we’re not happy with their decisions on steam. Alex has posted in this thread so hopefully he’s still got an eye on it and noting down our thoughts & feelings.
I don't think anything that's been said is name calling or trying to denigrate an individual. However by the same token, it's not unreasonable to consider what role the Executive Producer, a fairly senior position in a commercial company/business, might have played in the downfall of steam. If only to give credit for (maybe) standing and fighting our corner but being instructed from higher up, do as you're told or look for a new job.
I do think there's more to this than meets the eye because Matt was always so excited about steam and we know he loves it. I do think there's a reason we're hearing these things from the community manager and he's been very silent on it. And with the PR responses I feel like its coming down from higher up. None the less I do appreciate the job both Alex and Matt do. Its just the frustrating stance DTG as a company seem to take. But as said we don't know what goes on behind closed doors which is all the more frustrating
Don't worry, I've been following the thread from the beginning and it always comes out with the same critical attitude. Of course criticism can always make a difference, but does it have to be 20 pages long in the end? BTW: To think that all 3rd parties have the same negative opinion about the current state of Steam in TSW would be naive in the end.
But the fact it is 14 pages long shows how people feel. Its a critical attitude because of the way we've been treated for supporting steam development and its something we're all passionate about. We're allowed to be frustrated at the state its been left in. To quote JT who know their stuff "Steam is Borked" in TSW. Victory works is another developer of solid steam content who again sees that steam is Borked. We've had a few known quality steam developers come in and go "We're not touching that with a 10ft Barge pole". And even if other third parties are interested do they have the capability to fix and sort out the mess thats been left? And then create a route and loco? Even if that happens this doesn't get us the fixes for PFR and SOS. So DTG do need to take some responsibility
Please enlighten us as to your expertise on this matter? Are you one of or represent one of these third parties who are consulting with DTG on doing something for steam traction? Do you have some professional involvement with the core software so can speak with authority that third parties will be able to overcome the borked mess? Otherwise there is no evidence to counter the statement by Victory Works and through them JT, that steam is not happening any time soon.
While SimRail hasn't released their first steam loco yet, there is another sim-game called Derail Valley which has two steam locos modelled, and which likes to get into at least some of the gritty details of operating the locos it includes. It's taken me a while to work up to trying one of the steam locos, and I can now report on how well they did. The steam physics model seems to be on a similar level to the core steam-loco model in RailWorks (which some people now call TSC). That is to say, the steam-chest pressure is a direct function of the regulator lever position and the boiler pressure, and there is a simple model of "fire temperature" which can be influenced by dampers, draught, and to a lesser extent fire-mass. This isn't particularly great, but that still means that the boiler model is significantly improved over what is in TSW, even though the "engine" model is inferior. The loco can almost completely be managed from the 2D control panel, but you can also shovel coal by hand if you want. An advance over RailWorks is that the loco can be cold-started, though this process is deliberately accelerated so that lighting the fire takes only a few seconds (though the fuel consumption is still representative of a long warm-up session), and conversely letting the fire go out through lack of fuel is not a game-over. Management of fuel, sand, lubrication oil, and in this case water is a key part of Derail Valley gameplay, with the player having to take the loco to service points to top up these essentials (and pay for them), and this actively encourages efficient driving without needing to explicitly craft scenarios where that is an enforced goal. Positioning the loco with sufficient accuracy under the water and coal cranes is more than a little bit tedious. Derail Valley also has a recent track record of improving its physics model. In particular, the diesel-electric model was overhauled in the most recent patch, which also introduced the battery-electric "microshunter". This leaves open the possibility of improvements to the steam loco physics, in which the low-hanging fruit would be modelling the steam-chest in terms of steam flow rather than a direct derivation of pressure. I could also suggest to them one specific improvement to each of their diesel-hydraulic and diesel-mechanical models, though both are already quite good (vastly superior to the corresponding RailWorks core). At this point I have only tried the smaller of the two locos, which is an 0-6-0T closely resembling the USATC S100, brought to the UK during WW2. The larger one is a 2-8-2 tender loco, which should be significantly more powerful and flexible. Derail Valley does not appear to restrict itself to loco designs originating from one particular country. The diesel-mechanical loco looks very much like a BR Class 04, though the details of its powertrain are clearly different, while the diesel-hydraulic is obviously inspired by some German designs such as the V100. Of the two diesel-electrics, the smaller resembles a modern "modular" light shunter design popular in Continental Europe (similar to, but a smaller model than, the G6), and the larger is rather obviously an SD40-2 in drag, right down to the appearance of its "slug" derivative. The air brakes used on all wagons and locos approximately follow the UIC conventions in operation.
...good question, especially the reveal part. Let's put it this way, I'm also a supporter of steam traction in TSW and have an interest in it. But I don't want to say more about it at the moment... I actually wanted to support the Steam group with my comment yesterday, but the fact that so much frustration has built up is not nice. Since some are developers themselves and have a clue, I don't want to influence their opinions. But you should treat each other fairly and not portray the other as naive, that annoyed me a little yesterday.
I'm sorry for my use of that word yesterday. It was unfair and I appreciate you bringing it up again so I can understand your position more and apologise. As you say this thread is now 14 pages of disappointment, anger and frustration and it is occasionally interrupted by the DTG fan bois telling us to shut up, go away, stop whining, etc. so nerves are a bit frayed when people say things like "you shouldn't always interpret things in such a negative way". That makes it sound like we're all overreacting and just being negative for the sake of it, without any reason. As I said, I see a LOT of reason for the negativity. In fact I see almost zero reason for positivity - because DTG have given us nothing to be positive about for TSW steam, just empty promises and the cold shoulder. I'm sure we'd all be over the moon if a 3rd party comes along and sorts out the current mess, but the fact that DTG are incapable of doing it themselves doesn't instil a lot of confidence. Call it a broken dream for me - I wanted to spend some spare time learning new skills (something I love), thinking creatively (something I love), making steam trains (something I love), and producing something to make people go "Wow!" (something I love) Two weeks of evenings and weekends in the "editor" (after 3 weeks in standard UE4 before it) followed by DTG saying "we're not fixing anything to do with steam" broke that dream. The trust is gone, they don't deserve it. And until they prove they aren't just con-men (selling products on future features that never come, selling broken products they never fix) then I will remain "negative. The onus is on them to do things right, not just for a quick £. My negativity isn't all pervasive. Still loving the high quality content of TSC. I've clocked over 250 hours in Simrail since September. Century of Steam is looking amazing. I'd love for TSW to be in that conversation - currently it's not, and the language and actions coming from DTG are saying it never will be.
With regard to Derail Valley, well I haven’t played it for months and only once since their “simulation” transformation. I found the steam loco interesting but it didn’t really gel with the rest of the gameplay paradigm for me. Having to juggle the controls, manual firing but still having to navigate with the map and use the remote control jiggery thing to set the points plus keeping an eye on speed limits with no HUD to guide you. SimRail though I am quite anticipating their take on steam traction. I hope it will be good.
I read your post there and I just wish DTG could at least offer some support in trying to fix the model of steam because honestly the Hayling Branch line with Terriers would've been an instant hit with me. Like it would've been amazing if DTG could've worked with you to try and figure something out. But as you say with the best will in the world unless someone fixes the initial mess of steam its just unfortunately so far away. And thats the majorly frustrating thing! We could have so much new amazing content but because DTG have left steam in a heap we're stuck as we are with two broken routes
I bet if DTG opened up the underlying systems for Steam locos in the editor the community could fix steam locos.
Well we don’t know if that is possible. More likely the underlying systems are buried deep in the core code which only the programmers can sort out. If it was the case otherwise, then VW/Pete would not have had to throw the towel in with frustration.
Thank you for your detailed reply. It wouldn't have been necessary to apologize, because I can relate to frustrating situations. As I said, I don't want to give too much away here, but I'm more of a modeler than a programmer at the moment. That's why I'm currently more concerned with optics than with driving behavior and maybe that's why I don't see the complete picture yet. But in my opinion, DTG has an interest in continuing to implement Steam (not least because of a passionate Matt). I also think that there is a certain pressure to constantly produce DLCs, although some things fall by the wayside due to time constraints. But the awakened community always creates the corresponding headwind, which hopefully gets the ship back on course. In the end, finding the perfect steam setting, especially considering the complexity in UE4, is certainly not the easiest thing in the world. At least by entering the steam thread I was apparently able to correct the mood curve somewhat upwards.
AIUI, steam physics are all run on Simugraph, which (in theory) can be configured to simulate anything from a railbus to a gas turbine. What it really depends on is the implementer including the right components, in the right configuration, with the right interconnections, and the right input and output variables. That is, as in all things, the devil is in the details. I have no doubt that the person with the requisite skillset exists. The question is whether s/he can be located, and then persuaded to do it.
It would use Simugraph which is using Unreal Engines blue prints so its not deep in the code. Blue prints are still programming it just more of a visual way to program then writing C++ directly. There are plenty of people in the modding community that can use blue prints and code C++. Perhaps what ever DTG did in simugraph for steam is so flawed the whole thing has to be redone, but I have no doubt there are people that could rebuild it if those parts of the game were exposed in the editor. Steam no doubt need some work to get working and DTG current business model of minimal effort then shove it out the door keep steam in its current state.
If the EP and members of his team are so passionate about steam traction ( and freight for that matter ), they should go out and hire people with the necessary skills set and just do it. So what if they have to spend some time and money. It's not as if DTG employees are lining up at the soup kitchen. They keep telling us that Focus is leaving them to do as they please. And any train simulator with any claim to authenticity absolutely has to build steam engines; it's a sine qua non. And you can't claim to be a serious train sim based on electric commuter traffic alone.
No one's really delved into what the Public Editor can do with Simugraph, probably because there aren't any tutorials. But I imagine no one's really willing to work on fixing up steam for free.
Have you seen what modders do with of other games or even what they do within the train sim community. why would they balk at doing better steam sim if they could? Its just a question of how much the public editor can alter.
It's a lot of work without any recompense, and the culture surrounding payment in the sim community is very different from that in other games.
The Falcon 4.0's & IL-2 CoD's of the world are very few and far between, most broken games do not get as lucky as those two did, and even then those got fixed after years of work. Granted we're not talking a entire game, but I can't imagine reprograming the entire steam simulation is a simple weekend job.
The person behind the current steam simulation in Derail Valley got hired because of the many great mods they made for Derail Valley. One of those mods was a more realistic firing and steam simulation. It was very much a weekend job until he got hired as dev. Look at the mod community around Derail valley and RailRoader. RailRoader is very new, but the amount of mods out for it is impressive and its fun seeing people figure stuff out. I have no doubt some one will add better steam sim to RailRoader. There are a lot of games with big mod community's Some examples out side of train sims. Kerbal space program has a massive moding community. One mod comes to mind, the realistic progression and real solar system overhauls. It makes kerbal space program in a realistic rocket sim, adding in new game system parts, physics. Yeas of development has goin in to its crazy. I have even helped a few time writing out part configs. The Stalker Anomaly mod or all the various Stalker stand alone projects. They are all multi year projects. The Stalker modding community has rebuilt that old game engine adding new features fixing bugs, adding more modern rendering fixing issues to adding 64bit. Then there is of course Skyrim. the list could go on. There are a lot of talented people out there who can be passionate about their interest and well people love steam trains. Again Its just a question of how much the public editor can alter.
What you are missing here is that Derail Valley's steam simulation already had all the basics included, unlike TSW's. Those are different games that have different communities - remember the uproar when Skyrim tried to add paid mods? - and furthermore they are games that do not have new paid versions released every year.
Can I just add my feelings to this thread? I am extremely disappointed that the bosses at DTG have decided not to make any more steam content, especially after all the fuss and fanfare we had about Spirit of Steam. However, I am disgusted that they intend to leave promises unfulfilled. Still, no control over water level and fire, features that we were told were coming soon. And the locomotives left in such a state that third parties are unlikely to want to get involved. I loved Spirit of Steam but the beautifully crafted route is so empty. I honestly believed that it would have been fleshed out with locomotive dlcs like Tees Valley was but nothing. It's like a ghost route. And Peak Forest, again, beautifully done but from Ambergate? All these arguments have been made many times, all I can say is that since I heard them announce this, I haven't touched TSW4. I feel so let down by this company and now have the impression their game is not intended for enthusiasts like me, we are not their target audience and our custom is no longer required. Very sad end to a time of hope and excitement for a future that is now not to be.
DLC for SOS was a certainty I thought. I don't even have it installed now as it looks empty and not realistic. The only reason PFR is installed is for the class 104 when it arrives. It is a shame that both routes, which are both wonderful creations will likely see no steam DLC and we are left with unfulfilled promise and silent AI steam engines. Why DTG seem to have chosen to just develop modern DLC and not provide the variety you would think they'd strive for, I do wonder!
I only really have SOS installed for layering otherwise it hasn't got any value. PFR I didn't even consider buying and likely won't.
I'm gonna be slightly against the current here and say PFR is probably the one route I don't regret getting on release. Despite its many flaws like poor timetable, poor 4F service selection and steam physics issues I like the route itself. I find it very well modelled and looks great (apart from the odd missed hill). Plus the drop off Goods scenario was a really refreshing change Its just a shame it got dumped because I still enjoy the route and adding those features in we were promised would've at least helped a little bit
DTG: Steam is dead as a dodo, theres no content being worked on, we're avoiding fixes etc. Community: Also DTG:
