The Crashing Vs. Licences Poll!

Okay, this poll is obviously purely hypothetical and not tied into any official inquiry or statement. Having said that, if the option existed to eliminate crash animations in TSW in favor of potentially landing more licences, would you support it? Or is the potential to wreck the train a core part of the TSW experience tag that should not be removed? There's no right or wrong here, just trying to gauge general thoughts and opinions.

Again, hypothetically, let's just say the crash animation would be replaced by a fade-to-black SPAD notification, or something similar. The actual game-ending sequence doesn't really matter, if you can think of something more suitable then that's what it will be.

 

We really don't have crash animations though, yes we see trains "derail" technically, but nothing that can be described as a "crash animation". It's barely anymore a crash than what you get in MSFS with crashes enabled. As far as I'm concerned there's no question to be asked, we don't have them currently. and given all the issues DTG already have on their plate it would be very low priority to do them even if licensing was out of the question.

The bigger concern for me is the in-ability to turn off safety systems, as far as I'm concerned if licensors start mandating the removal to turn those off then DTG really need to tell them off. I always play with them on these days, but I respect peoples choice to run with them off, and for a good while I also played with them off as I personally didn't want to learn them out the gate. It's unacceptable to throw those players under the bus for the sake of other company relations.

That being said while I know people like deflecting the blame from DTG toward the train operator in this case. Frankly DTG should've done a better job and got basic approval for standard TSW features like that in writing before they ever started development.

 

It's an interesting discussion and the best I can really pick is on a case by case basis.

The current crash mechanism is probably about right for 95% of the cases but if having a more restrictive depiction or simply a game over message was key to getting an elusive licence, then it might be worth it.

The one thing we don't want is more graphic crashes or derailments (other than those accidentally caused by a game bug).

Of course the daft thing about the LIRR situation is that someone could easily pop a Class 47 and Mark 2 coaches on the route in Off The Rails mode and if so inclined film themselves running at 70 MPH into the back of a M3, M5 or to come M9 and the LIRR safety systems will do nothing to stop it.

 

I see the service failure feature acting the same role as dying in other games. Removing crashing by simply telling the user "you failed" with just a simple screen isn't the right way to do feedback, like if you imagine a GTA wasted screen pops up instantly with no ragdolling / animation of any sort will make players confused.

If anyone really wants more licensers happy to see their route crashless-by-demand, the ways to make removing crashing acceptable might be:

• Fix the bug that allows you to continue after SPADing by saving and loading altogether
• Stop the time when a crash should be happening, and tell the player what would happen next
• Make a virtual system that would apply emergency brake when train is about to derail

Unfortunately, those are simply not entertaining & intuitive than a simple crash animation.

 

But they already do that with SPADs and a ton of other stuff.

 

I don't really see crashes as they exist now in TSW being problematic, they fade to black like a SPAD now. They're not graphic whatsoever and more akin to a mishap on a model railway layout. Though I will say, I don't think trains should be launching out of the atmosphere or jumping sideways into a hedge if a derailment happens, it feels a bit too slapstick.

The scenario I see them being really problematic were if they were graphic and violent. Crashes are tragedies, even the smallest little hiccup could lead to a large scale incident, especially during the early eras before the introduction of safety systems. TSW is meant to simulate day-to-day driving from a driver's perspective and crashing is something I truly pray nobody ever has to go through.

Anyone hoping for big, realistic crashes are playing the wrong game, and I have seen the occasional request for them over the years...

I think another more important factor that might start affecting DTG negatively though is the passenger NPC system. It's getting silly, you have the game NPCs walking in front of you on the tracks in stations or exiting out of trains from the wrong side (again, onto the tracks), even if the doors on that side are closed!

I can't imagine LNER or TFL being too happy seeing an Azuma or 710 running over an NPC. While there's no graphic for it and the NPC just phases through, it's still not a good look from the cab... Sorting out NPC behaviour should be a high priority fix before it truly becomes a licence issue for DTG.

 

Good point about the “one unders”. Even the new Goblin Line has issues at one or two of the stations. I imagine if that happens on the new LIRR and someone at MTA were to spot it, DTG will be getting an immediate “remove from sale” notice.

 

This is the stupid irony with DTG, they'll do X, Y, or Z for some strange reason, but will have something that goes against. The AI passengers are a great example. but another example I can think of is DTG telling players to stay off the track, while at the same time encouraging players to that by hiding collectables near them. Like, make up your mind, do you want me on the damn tracks or not?

Also, another bit of irony is that because DTG make it so damn hard to derail on curves and switches you can blast down the rails at speeds well past what you're supposed to do. Ironically resulting in the popularity of things like races where players are blasting down the rails at 200MPH where going past 20 would derail you if the game were more realistic. Now that I think about it I honestly have to wonder how LIRR would feel about players that do that for this route...

 

I don’t think crashes should be shown at all, especially for those people who have lost family members/ friends in railway disasters

 

You wanna crash things, play BeamNG.drive.

 

This is so stupid.

Did people not read what Matt said in the other thread?

But, sure, let's continue a pointless discussion

 

I think that crash prevention is important in the simulator title, and in real life. Defaulting to no safety systems seems to encourage accidents and I personally think that policy would best be replaced with in game messages showing what happened, for example:

Player is approaching a red at 30Mph, they cross the TPWS speed trap and the system comes on. Now instead of the game ending with a "Signal Passed At Danger" message the train likely doesn't SPAD so instead of getting kicked out of the scenario the player is now presented with a stopped train. The game can then teach the player with a window explaining what happened then provide instructions to contact the signaller and guide them through getting the train ready to resume, and with knowledge of safe approach speeds to hopefully prevent another incident, and enjoy the game more.

I think that it makes sense for the game to encourage safety in the real world as well as being entertaining. We should also have authorised walking routes too, not like the crazy Edinburgh - Glasgow Engineering Express where you are expected to jump allover the place to get to the Class 66.

TSW could present a nice casual opportunity for a glimpse of real world safety.

 

I didn't see the other thread myself but I was talking more generally about portrayal of crashes, rather than how it affects licensing or anything like that.

 

no need to change anything there are no crash animations at all in this game (it is derail animations)
the train is still ok after the crash in real life it usually also means it need repairs

 

Then why have you brought up crashes at all (which you have done, multiple times, over several years)?

 

In case you wonder about the topic and didn't notice what happened, I'll give you a quick recap.

In the LIRR 2.0 live article, after a question of mine regarding why safety systems are always on and can't be turned off there, we had a really intensive conversation about how operators refrain from giving licences or at least don't favor having crashes in the game connected to their brand. The idea also came up why we have crashes in the game at all then. Really interesting conversation with Matt shining some light behind the curtains and gives insights.

You can read the whole discussion up from my post here:
https://forums.dovetailgames.com/th...hempstead-hicksville.80443/page-5#post-825150

 

They don’t play the game then or they play it properly. It’s not the same crash as you see in real life with crushed trains or whatever it looks like. Personally having seen two people being transformed into smashed potatoes, that doesn’t stopped me working for the railroad company nor playing TSW because the train can derails.

 

We've been asked politely by the Executive Producer of TSW to end this pointless discussion of crashes. Can you guys not respect that?

Frankly it's getting on my last nerve and I'm willing to bet I'm not alone.

Moderator?

 

I was simply gauging interest on a topic I was curious about, not trying to prove a point. The word "hypothetical" was used twice, whether this situation is practical at all is beyond my ken and I honestly had no idea it was such a sore point. Y'know, just a fan of the game trying to start up a discussion.

But by all means, let me step aside and leave to you to the countless "dtg sux they don't know what they're doing" topics.

 

It’s alright, enjoy your Friday night with your family.

Have a nice weekend.

 

Don't want or care about crashes. My simming background is back to the 1990s with flight simulators and crashing was always something like just a freeze screen telling you game over. This isn't grand theft auto, a crash should just be a black screen game over you screwed up.

 

Absolutely agree. Physics (and sound) as close to the prototype as we can get, (though, steam? ), the rest is what it is.

 

The polls get worse. This just feels like a really silly post

 

From my point of view - its simple - what we have today is perfect. We can make mistakes it ends our run in the game in the same way it would have a significant impact on a drivers career.

We mustn't draw too much attention to this stuff - because we absolutely DO NOT want a situation where making a mistake is impossible. This is a sim, there must be a challenge, if we can't make a mistake, we might as well watch cab ride videos.

 

The only thing I would like to see changed is more severe AP penalties for non game ending infractions. Speeding, missing a stop or halting too far short of or overshooting a station platform slightly. Maybe not as punitive as TSC where your 1000 points can disappear if you’re two minutes late, but enough to focus minds on doing the task properly and (simulated) safely.

So to take my earlier example of doing 50 MPH on WSR, not only should you get no AP, your points should go down into the minus including coming off your career total. Severe? Maybe but it would address casual bad practices.

 

Not really, you can speed to high hell and barely get penalized for it. I'm no expert, but if I knowingly blow past a speed sign 40+ MPH over it I would assume the railway isn't gonna treat me much better than blowing past a red signal even if somehow nothing bad happens. And that gets into the point that you can take many curves and switches at speed that you absolutely would derail on IRL. This in combination with the participation reward tendencies of the scoring system allows for some really stupid driving.

Frankly Matt's statements make me question why we have the system we do now, I would argue it already does cross the line on being too easy. If I tackle a curve 30+ MPH over the speed limit and I would derail IRL, it should derail in the sim in the same situation.

 

Very weighted wording on the poll there. Not just a neutral "Just leave it as it is" for keeping the status quo, but rather a very specific wording that most people in favour of not changing things would not necessarily agree with the sentiment of. Sure, it's "Essential" to the TSW experience in the sense that the game stops being a simulation when you remove all the phsyics, but most average players are not going to agree that "crashing is essential" on the face of it, because they don't crash their trains.


I don't think anyone wants "Brio Railway Before Your Bedtime World"


I can write a poll in weighted language too, see?

Would you rather have:
1: Realistic prototypical physics simulation for rolling stock
or
2: No crashes or derailment possible in the engine

 

You make an interesting point.

I have been playing Police Simulator Patrol Officers and it’s not the greatest game in the world… BUT they doing something great with the scoring.

They keep score of two different things; one that accumulates points for your positive/justifiable actions. And another score for your “conduct” that starts at 100 and can go down to zero. If you commit too many “bad conduct” actions and your conduct score goes to zero, your shift ends early.

Would be a cool optional scoring option for folks that want to be rated more harshly on their train driving infractions.

 

Legal liability, and they tell you stay off track in real life

Its a game

 

So OpenRails has "toy physics" now?

 

Being just a game doesn't justify having the game telling you that doing X isn't ok, while also requiring you to do it for Y. The whole point of game design is to make sure the optimal way of playing the game encourages players to do what the developers want. If you want to make a player use a flying powerup you don't make it easier to just run on the ground. Likewise if you want the player on the ground and don't want them skipping some difficult obstacle you don't give them a flying power up. Or you design the level in a way where even with the flying powerup you still have to interact with it, put it in a cave and add a celling for example.

It's not like you even need to cut collectables entirely, after all we see them all the time in places like stations or signal boxes, and that's fine. It's stuff like the logs on NTP that are where things get annoying.

 

It doesn't tell you to stay off the tracks in game, it tells you to stay off the tracks in real life

 

And this is a game that's simulating real life, if it tells you to do something IRL it's reasonable to apply the same standards to the game world.

 

No it isn't. As an example every modern driving racing game whether open world or circuit tells you to obey traffic laws in real life, yet actively encourages you in game to drive as fast as possible

Real life railways and roads are dangerous, pretend roads and railways are not

Edit: Except for Taxi Life

 

I think the game should stop us walking along the tracks to get collectables and change free roam completely so that we get the points for driving the train, can stop and get out for trackside collectables and safety systems and signals are disabled as we would be the only train on the track. Right now I find free roam to be pointless because you waste the time driving the route and get nothing for it at the end. fixing it to enable the collecting of things would make it useful

 

no point in doing so, those that want it can as it is, those that don’t, don’t touch it.

 

I'm not a big fan of free roam and refrain from using it, since there is nothing else you can do with it as placing your loco(s) on the tracks and do something with it, maybe take advantage of that signals aren't red or yellow because of no other units come across and therefore rush a route from end to end. But there is no challenge, no other trains which force you to take a stop at your path and therefore take care of the signals or even fictional (self-made) passenger services to take over. In case of the latter, Scenario Planner is good but still lacks a lot of features, is buggy so that f.e. passenger don't spawn at stations or is simply to fiddly and complicated in a situation when you "just want to have fun" with your locos.

With the spawn-in feature introduced with TSW4, I just can spawn any loco I want in running on foot in timetable mode and have a challenge to find my way through the other services. The only issue still is that I can't use my favorite train to overtake a timetable service of my choice. I already made a suggestion for that to Matt (don't know if he can recall it), but that would be an amazing feature for the next iteration of the franchise, and I hope it's one of the main features of TSW5.

I didn't know that collectibles can't be found/catched in free roam. That's weird.

 

I quite enjoyed putting music on the headphones and walking the length of Sand Patch and SKA to pick up collectibles and watch the trains go by.

 

Can we get collectible Triang Hornby buffet cars...



I will get my ban...

 

Collectables are there to collect in all parts of the game. I meant turning free roam into the best way to get them without having to walk along the route. So you can spawn in any loco/unit you want to drive (that will work because it would be automatically off the rails) and the safety systems/signals are disabled because there's only your train on the route and that's the only train you can spawn in. As we don't earn the XP for driving the route in free roam (or spawning in on timetable) we might as well have free roam being useful for something!

 

Freeroam is nothing for players who need a "task" to see a purpose in the game.