Nexuxscraft has promised a free BR 99 steamer included in his Brockenbahn project... time will tell I guess.
Railroader is a great operational game, but the train physics are highly simplistic. If you want serious realism, in steam trains, then look at the (under development) Century of Steam
How accurate are polls these days on Twitter? I don't use Twitter anymore but a 1000 votes looks like a way broader poll than active forum users?
But the forum is not over run by bots I suppose? But sure, only sales figures are the real indicators.
I don't get it - I drove a Scotsman service on W Somerset and it was beautiful, full of life and soul. Why wouldn't customers want more of this and why wouldn't a developer who basically pioneered it, want to continue to improve it? Do we really think this doesn't have a place in the panoply of trains and also, games? And don't say "money" because the money is in the next iteration of GTA or Counter-Call-of-Strike-Duty-Battlegrounds ... thingy.
There was much excitement on the forums when SOS was being developed, except for a handful who only want content which they like and don't care for others. Therefore, I still don't understand why this decision has come about. Steam is still visible on today's railways with steam railtours, and with the abundance of heritage railways. I don't believe it is generational, steam was long gone by the time I was born and I have a interest in the railways of the past as do many my age. There are many far younger volunteers on heritage railways. Maybe DTG don't feel they can spare the development time to fix the issues so have decided to shelve steam in the state of flux it is in or maybe they can't fix the issues. Or maybe, in my desire to be glass half full there is a promising reason the class 104 pack has moved positions on the roadmap.
I'm going to be unpopular here say that for ME as a casual player, steam is "good enough" physics-wise. I don't know how much of the player base (as opposed to the forum community) is like me vs "hard core" enthusiasts, but I'd ALWAYS like more trains. The problem is... will it find an audience? it seems like a compromise would be to make something like the "expert 101" except in steam power. Find something popular (remake of the Flying Scotsman seems popular around here given how popular that is) that itself has a custom steam system as part of it. If you want hard core steam... you have it. If not... you don't. The rails themselves are just rails so you can run anything you want on it. If it succeeds, more will come following that example. The problem...again.... is finding someone (or team) to actually do that work and produce that "expert" product. Digital Combat Sim (DCS) does something similar and it seems to work pretty well. You can fly the "normal" (very basic" A-10A aircraft for example, or you can "upgrade" and buy the A-10C model with all the bells and whistles. Nothing really changes externally, just internally for the pilot (engineer.)
Yeah, it's definitely not generational. As someone born in 1991, I should probably be one of these people demanding nothing but modern era content. Thanks to the combination of a certain cheeky blue tank engine and my Dad, who only has interest in the period of early steam to BR diesels, my interest was shaped through that upbringing. He would often take me to heritage railways growing up and it's still something we do together now. When steam was finally announced to be coming to TSW, I couldn't be anymore hyped! It was the single biggest announcement for TSW since the launch of the game itself and there hasn't been another on that level since Spirit of Steam either. Fast forward to now and I'm just more baffled than anything. They've made no improvements to the core steam simulation, but rather than come clean and say "We know it's not good enough, and we'll try even harder to improve going forward", they've just dropped their fire and started avoiding it altogether. It went from the biggest announcement to the biggest disappointment of TSW. Part of me hopes they've just done this to get people off their backs while they fix and improve steam secretly in the background without having to provide constant updates on the forums or roadmap, which would then be featured in a surprise patch but I think I have more chance of winning the lottery right now.
Agreed. The lacklustre development of Steam in TSW, IMO, again demonstrates the massive downfall UE has had on the simulation aspect of the game and how hard it has made getting the physics rights. Even when everyone raves about how good it is and how much more it has added, it clearly hasn't made a difference to Steam physics, which is clearly too hard for the devs to get right.
Can’t really agree with this. Steam as it stands in TSW at present is sub arcade level. I mean the locos don’t even physically consume coal and water from the tender, for heck’s sake. That and the relation between regulator and cut off is all wrong. Wheelslip at 15% throttle on 65% cut off, no way! Jubilee that can outperform Class 86 AC electrics on the flat out of Crewe. If you have experienced even the most basic level of steam in TSC or MSTS, the TSW implementation is so wide of the mark as to be laughable. The exhaust doesn’t even change colour if the non existent coal is being added to the firebox. To all intents and purposes, steam in TSW is like those old Triang Hornby locos fitted with the Seuthe smoke units. A simple up and down for speed DC motor with a fancy effect.
Exactly why I don't understand people demand more steam. From the one steam route I have tried I really didn't feel like entering the steam age. Felt like a park theme ride.
Well I think most of us commenting in favour of steam, want more steam and the improvements. Not development of it stopped all together and certainly not left in the state it is. If the EMUs were released in a similar state the forum would have gone into meltdown. If the AI Electrostars or the DB class 101 for example were silent, what would the response be, users wouldn't stand for it?
If that was the case I probably never would have bought so many DLC. I bought into TSW because I knew they were really good at building trains. When I saw steam I noticed that there is a limit on how well you can build trains. I'm not looking at it from an emotional view but more from an economic view. Will you ever get steam like it should be in TSW? Why waste time on something you are not good at? I'm a musician. I don't do classical music. It would really be a waste of time for me to get classical music right.
I'm however bothered how resources are allocated for building this game. The thing is that I'm also not bothered with freight but I do buy freight DLC and enjoy it from time to time. It's not about what I like but what I think is feasible
Well last night I bought the Flying Scotsman for £6.23 I gave it a whirl before I went to bed, it was great. I'm fairly new to this sim but to me the model looked good and it seemed to work OK and I enjoyed it. Like I said in an earlier thread, it is a rail simulator, and steam is another era, if you don't want or like steam engines don't bother with them, same as the Deisels vs Electric you drive what you like. At the moment I like them all, I'm also a mood type, what I mean is if the mood takes me I drive a Steam or a Deisel or an Electric and I enjoy it at the time. Col.
Glad you enjoy it, Col, but in truth Flying Scotsman is the worst of the four steam locos in the game. The 3D art is good and they did slightly better with sound but the physics and challenge of running a steam loco just aren’t there. It’s essentially as I said a Triang Hornby model placed in the game to look good in screenshots and sell a few more copies of the routes it appears in. It didn’t even come with a decent rake of accurate coaching stock or the all essential support vehicle. In overall terms, the original Kuju FS in MSTS was better!
Well as a classical musician I would always say give it a try as you don't know what you're missing. I think steam done well could be as awesome an experience as listening to a Vaughan-Williams Symphony! DTG and partners are very good at building trains including the steam content, unfortunately steam isn't set up as well and doesn't feel that realistic.
I do know what I am missing but the world would not win a great classical artist with it I guess. It's more about protecting the world of such ambitions
That's why I suggested someone who DOES enjoy steam to build an "advanced/expert" steam engine to prove it can work. Plenty of third party content is created for this game, and DTG doesn't seem like they know how to do it, so someone with knowledge and skill needs to do it for them. As a bonus you'd make a bit of money on selling it to steam fans. Who would you trust to make a decent steam loco and how do you contact them?
With the underlying flaws, the missing features and controls and UI, the indications that Simugraph can't handle it - I don't see how a third party can get even close to something reasonable, let alone advanced/expert. Everything we've managed to do with TS is built on a solid (if simplified) base and scripting has allowed us to do almost anything with it - oil fired steam locos, mechanical gas turbines, realistic coal fired steam locos, auto-trains, fireless locos. But it all started with a Black 5 and a 7F that worked correctly and had the basic features.
Wait, so steam works right on TS? Sorry I haven't gotten around to TS yet, still learning TSW. Wonder what TSW4 inevitably upgrades to (TSW5 no doubt) and if the engine (underlying programming engine, not the loco) will evolve to. Maybe something with more detailed inputs for the complexity of steam? It seems like in the meantime they could work on script for things that are "low hanging fruit" like fuel flow. I THINK I've seen fuel flow work for diesel trains, and we have the animation and physics for changing cargo weight so changing "fuel" for a steam engine (coal/water) should still be achievable with the existing system. (We have hoppers and tankers that load/unload in game) It won't solve all the problems, but would satisfy SOME of the complaint and show progress. Having said that, to ME as an admitted casual it's not really that important mainly because the routes are so short. For most intents and purposes you don't notice fuel differences and you'll NEVER run out of fuel on a 30-45 minute run. Now Cajon Pass with the slow, steep inclines... maybe? I generally get around 11mph on those hills with the Jubilee on Free Roam, so that run can take 2.5 hours for the whole track. I have no idea how much fuel a Jubilee "should" use on that much of a run at basically fully throttle, but the routes steam are on aren't generally that extreme for most of the game. PFR, SOS, and the rail tours are all pretty flat, quick runs. Someone mentioned the 80/20 rule and I think it's appropriate here. What is the investment to make all this "work" and will it pay in revenue for the design team time/effort? Especially if it means a whole new computational "engine" to enable it to work accurately. What would be the model to use for "accurate" steam? Are there any other games out there that do it accurately? How do they do it? Is there a script that could overlay specific to a loco in addition to the existing "Simulgraph"?
Do wonder whether different departments at DTG talk to each other… Another item on Facebook this morning extolling how wonderful TSW is and, guess what, Flying Scotsman is the centrepiece showcasing the UK. I appended a suitable comment.
