No clue if this is possible, but instead of "linked" routes which DTG says they can't do...what about more like a "playlist" of routes that simulate the effect? If you had 3 routes that touch for example, you could stop at one common station/location and it would "load in" the next route with your existing train consist. It's not seamless, you'd have a loading screen, but that would simulate a "pause" at that station where you pick up passengers/freight/etc. The key would be that you wouldn't have to go back out to main screen, go through several screens to launch the next route. The game would just "remember" what you ended that scenario with (what train/cars) and then spawn you in on the new route with that same kit. The elements are there. Just a matter of making them work together. Another compromise of the compromise would be planned trips (say it's in the timetable the same on both routes to "link" then, ex. a run from Eastbourned would "link" at Brighton, then you'd run LBC to London where it could "link" to SEHS, etc. Just a thought. Probably would take a lot of work and not many people would use it. For now I'll just stick to having to boot it all up myself, but just thought I'd throw it out there. They could sell TSW6 with their "cool new mode to enjoy longer trips!"
This is the kind of thing that looks easy to do, and when start to think what needs to be done to make it work you realize it is not easy at all. The services in each route are independent of each other. Yeah, they could do extra work and create services with the same names in all 3 routes, etc ... but even then, when you load a timetable each train is supposed to be in one place at an specific time. The system is not designed to spawn a specific service (the player train) somewhere else (where the player stopped it in the previous route). What if the player arrived too soon, or too late, and there is another train in that place? Probably too much work and development hours that can be used doing something else. We (the players) can just load a service that starts aprox. at the same time in the next route and get almost the same experience.
Probably yes, but it's easier than implementing a whole new system with entirely new logic and programming. The pieces already exist and the devs know how they work. There's even a "playlist" sort of thing in game because you have linked "journeys" that go right from one into the next. The only change would be going from a scenario on one route into another scenario instead of two scenarios in the same route. It doesn't even seem like it's so much a deep programming or "new" thing, just adding a cross-route "journey" which we already have that simply draws from different scenarios. The hardest part would be building the scenarios to link. Giving an example You create a "journey" that is 3 "scenarios." The first scenario is a trip from Eastbourne to Brighton on the East Coastway map. The second starts at Brighton and goes to London on the London Commuter map. Then maybe a third scenario from London to Reading on the Great Western map. It would just be a "Journey" with those 3 scenarios linked just like any other journey is linked. To the computer, it doesn't matter what scenarios it's linking. It's just pulling that next scenario up. All you have to do is click "next journey" and off you go! The only difficult part is creating the scenarios to match (same train, same livery, and compile them into a "journeys" playlist or whatever devs would call it) That could mean making sure the locos and routes match up (does that loco run on that line, etc) The bonus would be that they don't have to necessarily connect YET either. There are already services for example that say things like "Brighton to Penzance" which don't overlap in game (yet.) You could run out to Reading, then the next scenario in the "journey" picks up at St. Austell on the West Cornwall Local map. We don't have the rails between Reading and St. Austell, but it would "feel" like a continuation for now...and if that bit gets added later then it would be just a matter of adding one scenario to that route. It's not exactly the "modularity" that people want, but it's achievable short term and can give much of that experience. People can argue over what's "accurate" (what actual trains run where) but I think it'd be a neat feature that would require little NEW programming to do, just creating more scenarios in "journey" mode. Could even be just a DLC pack. Another even better example we don't have yet is the Antelope/San Bernadino/Cajon Pass since when that releases they will all overlap. Throw in the Peninsula and you could pretty much simulate the AMTRAK trains that run that whole route. Edit: There's an LNER route that goes from Kings Cross to Petersborough to Doncaster then Glasgow to Edinburgh then up to Abderdeen right? It's with the... 801? Seems like a good candidate to use three maps right there. (East Coast Mainline, Glasgow to Edinburgh, then Fife Circle) I mean... I can make up 3 scenarios to match those but I don't see any way to make them link into a "journey" so it'd take someone more skilled to do that.
Interesting proposal, but here the keyword is "scenarios". If all you want are linked "scenarios" everything is much simpler. First, in scenarios your train is predetermined (it is always the same one), and you can pretty much tell the player to stop the train at a specific point via the "stop exactly here" instruction at the end of the scenario. The game could then load the "part 2" scenario in the next route and make the player start in the exact same spot with the same train. Devs can probably adjust the start time in the "part 2" scenario to be the same as your end time in the "part 1". The thing is, if you do not want "scenarios" but services in "timetables" that are "teleported" from route to route (as suggested by the idea that the game "could load your existing train consist" in your first post) then it is all a completely different kind of beast.
Well the second is the ideal, preferably modifiable by the player (it detects what you are playing and you just drive to pre-set "spawn/despawn points), but the first option would be proof of concept and probably easier to sell. If there was a demand for the "journeys" then there would be a reason to devote more resources to it. I think I'd be satisfied with a bunch of "Journeys" for awhile that expand as routes do.
That sounds like a good way to do it, I guess the only hurdle (apart from the obvious development needed for it to work) would be the time periods of the routes. East Coastway, for example, is 2009, BML is 2017-18. The problem there is that Gatwick Express didn't use 387s in 2009 as they weren't yet built. As well as the obvious timetables being different thing. However, these things have a workaround. Option 1: have a bit of artistic license. For the sake of the "merge", keep things as they are. At the very least in terms of timetables. Rolling stock can be used with the caveat that it isn't entirely accurate, but for the time being is there as some sort of placeholder, or remove it altogether, until the appropriate stock is found. Option 2: build co-existing timetables for each route, ie BML with a 2009 timetable and ECW with a 2017-18 timetable. Again (apart from obvious issues on the development side) though, rolling stock is a problem, but the same caveat applied in Option 1 can also be used here. It would be a lot of work, yes, but in theory is doable.
Good suggestions! As the saying goes, "perfect is the enemy of practical." I'm sure people with far more knowledge of the intricacies of UK rail could give better options. I am a very casual fan of railroading and only really got into it with TSW. I don't know what's "authentic" or not. Was just giving examples of what could work to test the concept. Now, as you say it'd make a decent "placeholder." There are probably a lot of people on the forum who would give better examples of what would "fit" more authentically into this idea with proper rolling stock and eras. I will say that many of the routes aren't that old that it'd be entirely out of place to see older stuff running on it and the cars/houses/other assets aren't that "out of place" to make most of them immersive. Open invite to anyone who has any good suggestions for maps that could be journey/linked together? =-)
Great topic, I like the idea of linking the scenarios/routes. This is going to sound a bit off-topic, but bear with me; I dimly recall back in the Railworks (v2 or v3) days where the devs put together a rudimentary 'multiplayer' idea that, iirc you would start a scenario and end the drive at a specified area/station/yard, stop and send the save file to a friend who'd then load up the save of the scenario and carry on (think 'crew change'). I may be misremembering but I do recall sending files from runs on the York-Newcastle route to a good friend in Wales who'd carry on and complete the run. He'd then start a scenario and send me the file to finish. Anyway, what I'm trying to say is the idea of linking sounds very doable (you don't need multiple players) if DTG made it so one could easily save the progress of driving to a specific point set by the scenario, then load the new map (next applicable route) with the 'compatible' save file and scenario, allowing you to retrieve your train and carry on. One could easily come up with reasons...relief break, crew change, foot plate fry-up whatever. I hope I've made some semblance of sense.
in my mind everything that can be linked is already linked loading times are not that bad and most of the times i am not even in the mood to play more then 1 scenario or service in 1 session so i need a break anyway for me the linking thing is not really needed i would only vote for such thing if it was an option that could be turned on/off
I'm in. But I thought it could distort the magic of the Timetables (of the AI-driven trains). Let's say I arrive late or early at the station and upon arrival I find different AI services, or the station deserted. What happens when the new route is loaded? Do I have the same trains on the same tracks? Sure, information can be passed from one route to another. But during the ride instead? When the new route is loaded, the AI trains that were already running would be reset and restart from their portal or do you memorize and transfer/load the position of each one by calculating the time elapsed (the aforementioned your advance or delay on the timetable). Am I saying that the AI's progress could be more fake (random trains as happens on TSC)? This would be noticeable if I arrived at the linked route 2 or 3 or 4 not exactly on time. While the AI-driven trains always spawn in the same position when loading, I would always meet it in the same place, even if I was an hour late (accumulated in the previous linked route). These are my doubts. I mean: they already present critical issues now that we have to keep track of (times and positions) all the trains of a single route, you see red lights and queues of trains that prevent you from continuing (if you don't delete them manually). With more linked routes the situation could degenerate further. It would be expensive for everyone (developer and buyer) but perhaps it would be better to start a new project that includes joining the routes without loading (and maybe even include from the beginning, in the initial project therefore, the multiplayer so requested by a portion of players). But I already predict that no one will do it because the market tells us that you earn more with short routes. And they are also easier to make.
This has been suggested time and time again, and is pretty much as old as routes with common stations in TSW.
Well it'd be a specific scenario you'd choose, so it wouldn't be "on" unless you chose that run. It'd basically be like going into Journey mode now, just with scenarios on different routes.
In option 1, which I think is what we're discussing now, it'd just be two or more linked scenarios/timetables so they'd be preplanned to work together. You'd be spawning into the beginning of the other scenario (which you could presumably play on it's own too if that's your fancy) There'd be no "calculating." Now if you went ADVANCED and made it variable (you just drive from one route to another at any time) then that could be a lot more complicated. I don't think that's doable at the moment, but maybe in the future. However, still you'd be starting off as in any other timetable/scenario... not in the middle. It wouldn't "start" until you loaded it, so you'd always be starting at the beginning. I don't see a reason you'd be spawning into the middle of a timetable unless they were making a persistent multiplayer network which is WAY beyond what this thread is suggesting. For THIS thread, it's just... you play 1 run in one route, then load another one up if you want with the "play next" button.
I actually think there could be ways to implement this without much additional work. If there are services that “continue” on other routes, you could simply get a little tile allowing you to select them in the screen after a service (the one where you can go to the main menu, switch to on foot mode and so on). You would be spawned into the other route, but it would be just like starting the service from the main menu (so you’d still need to set up your train again etc.). The only thing that could be copied from one route to the other is the weather. This approach basically changes nothing about the existing services.
Sounds like it’d be nice to have but it’d be a waste of dev time if 1% of end users are going to use the feature. I don’t have access to their data but if the average user is not consistently playing sessions long enough to take advantage of something like this, then I guess what’s it for. Maybe they could do something with journey mode and have a journey consist of a multiple routes/services that are linked in some way, or something like that
Ok, but this way it really changes very little except the time to return to the menu and load a new route. I thought you could join multiple routes forming a consecutive segment like route 1 Aachen-Koln, in Koln you load and restart with route 2 that will take you from *Koln to Dusseldorf, then in Dusseldorf you load and switch to route 3 that will go Dusseldorf-Bochum (HRR). This way you would have a sort of route merging separated by a loading screen. It should be a bit more immersive I think. * Possible DLC needed to join SKA and HRR. Then maybe make a last dedicated DLC and insert the last part that will go Bochum-Dortmund (route 4) so you will have the sensation of traveling a single route (coming from Belgium) that will take us from Aachen to Dortmund. Now the Intercity and fast trains (ICE-Thalys) would make even more sense.
Moreso a simple cross-route scenario also bypasses the limitations of a route's time period. You can pick a date which best corresponds to the overlap in the route scenery and choose the rolling stock which will appear in the scenario based on that date. As none of it needs to correspond to the regular timetable of either route, due to the self-contained nature of the scenario, then it can give a seamless experience for those to whom such a string of scenarios appeals.
I’ve always thought a fun little method of changing routes, at least on foot (obviously can’t be driven) would be something like installing a fictional lift at Paddington on GWE and BKL. Just press Y to hop in the lift and it spawns you on foot on the opposite route. Sure, it’d only work for Paddington or another such route where driving across the ‘border’ isn’t an option, but it’d be a fun little quirk, especially if you enjoy being a passenger. Food for thought
That's.... the suggestion we made yes. That's exactly what's on the table. It seems like everyone keeps saying the same thing more or less at this point.
