I am just interested why haven't dovetail updated the game to unreal engine 5, if anyone knows please let me know.
This has been discussed previously. Probably because most of the content would need reworking into the updated format. If the hardware requirements are greater then you’re going to end up stiffing older console and potato PC users. Do they have developers and coders who can work with UE5 given the ongoing difficulties they seem to have getting the game to work optimally in UE4? The only way UE5 could really work is to launch an all new train game designed around it, effectively drawing a line under and leaving “as is”, the existing TSW.
I had that happen to me on other games and i felt cheated. People acting like UE5 is the holy grail of game engines should realy ceheck out some games that have realy bad performance.
I dont think anyone has said it’s the ‘holy grail’ of game engines but there is a lot that UE5 does better…lighting for one! To be brutally honest I think the coders at DTG arent capable or have reached their limits of fully exploiting the UE4.x engine!
Here's a thought, DTG could fix everything wrong with the game if they just learned how to do magic. The proper incantation, and all the code would fix itself, all the memory issues would go away because performance wouldn't depend on system specs if it was all done by magic, VR and multiplayer would just work, and every player would get a free unicorn. WHY HAVE DTG NOT SIMPLY DONE THIS?
This has been discussed countless times already. There is no point to it. Switching to UE5 would not magically result in a better running or looking game.
ok, so here we go again... besides the loss of all already released dlcs, we also have the fact that the problems in the game would not be solved as if by magic if UE5 were used subwaysim hamburg and subwaysim 2 (I own both on steam and both are UE5) don't let me lie, they have the same problems as tsw in terms of optimization, stutters, etc. please, stop thinking that UE5 would solve all the problems in the game, that couldn't be further from the truth
Simple answer is there not compatible, TSW uses a modded version of UE4, although UE5 is still called unreal engine its a very different beast, it would be like trying to fit the systems and mechanics of a 2025 volvo into a 1980s volvo, yes you could do it, but just about everything would have to be remodelled, changed and adapted, you would make some gains yes, but also cause a ton of issues, so it basically comes down to risk vs reward.
Well, you could have better lighting and fancy graphics... in exchange for: Many missing routes which may or may not be ported depending on what they deem is worth doing so. Brand NEW problems that comes with learning UE5. The possible abandonment of Gen 8 consoles and IF it has too many performance issues, a rocky experience on Gen 9. Possibly a price increase on the game itself given the awful trend if the game industry currently. PC Editor being rendered barely functional or unusable for the new game for quite awhile. if you're okay with that, feel free to make a conclusive list of reasons as to why it would be easier/more beneficial for the community as a whole to switch over to UE5.
I mean it would certainly justify a new version number more than the current annual releases do, and they've borked the TSW5 code so badly it might actually be easier to start from scratch. That being said, as someone who owns most of the DLC, i'd be MUCH more selective on what i'd buy again for a revamped UE5 version of TSW. Not getting fooled twice lol
I have seen reports that developers working on UE5 projects have found versions built on UE4 are much faster than UE5, which might imply that major optimization of the engine would be needed to port TSW - and almost certainly would lock out older or weaker machines. The additional capabilities of UE5 might not be worth the effort.
Also, updating TSW2 with even small point upgrades to the UE4 engine caused significant headaches for everybody, and UE5 is still being actively developed. I don't see DTG considering upgrading before UE5 itself has settled down into stability.
In fairness, I think DTG has been and is actively exploring the use of UE5 and has actually used elements of it in their coding.
Simply put, they’d have to start over and make a new TSW. Maybe some of the most popular routes would be remastered in UE5, but you’ll have to re-buy them. I’d actually welcome a fresh start, as the current TSW under UE4 is always going to be a bug infested playground for us simmers. I’d put money on it that 3 years from now the switch will happen.
When was the last time TSC got an engine upgrade? DTG won't waste time and resources remastering every old route in UE5, because they want to make money from selling new routes. And if you think current TSW5 players are going to repurchase over £1,000 of DLC, you must be smoking something really good.
That’s why I said selected routes, please read carefully, didn’t say all of them. That would be stupid! They’d look at the figures and see what is most popular. They could resell them if the incentive is there i.e. extensions. Would you rebuy the midland mainline if in UE5 with an extension to Sheffield? I know I would. People on the forums have been crying out for certain routes to be extended, so what better way to resell them in UE5.
People have also been complaining about TSW constantly being repackaged and resold, shifting up by one number. Extensions are nice, but they definitely wouldn't incentive alot of people if the current issues persist in a game with a brand new engine that introduces brand new problems. For what issues UE5 will bring, probably isn't worth transitioning to it anytime soon because it doesn't offer more than it takes to run it. Already, we can see DTG struggling to tackle long standing issues on UE4, introducing UE5 would stretch the team even further and guarantee even more bugs being left unresolved.
Exactly, so the game as it stands is a lost cause. It’s always going to be riddled with bugs due to the amount of features and content added to the core game. DTG say they will fix bugs, but that’s never the case is it. One bug fix equals two more bugs. That’s why IMO it would make sense for them to start fresh in UE5 and not transferring any existing content over to a new game. The shift to UE5 will happen in the next few years guaranteed. I mean we’ll still have all our content from TSW5 or TSW7, whatever it will be called by the time the transition happens. The team will just need to learn UE5 coding and familiarise themselves with it, that’s what will take time. It’s evident in the gaming industry most game companies are shifting over to UE5, eventually more and more companies will follow suit. It’s only a matter of time before DTG do. Do I care if the game uses UE4 or UE5? Not at all. I still think the game looks great in UE4, but the bugs aren’t going away anytime soon, and honestly they never will.
Who's to say they would even switch to UE5? UE has been blamed on several occasions for issues occurring with the game (notably tile loading causing stutter) so whatever the next engine might be, it may well be UE that gets ditched in favour of something else
One thing that TSW5 has in common with TSC is Simugraph. How do we know that it is not Simugraph causing the problems? TSC and TSW5 are both stuttering, crashing, memory leaking slideshows, and Simugraph is the one thing that they both share.
I wasn't aware TSC used Simugraph. Never really delved into that side but aren't physics etc. derived from a combination of blueprint and custom scripting?
TSC doesn't use Simugraph, nothing remotely like it. TSC uses a simple "black box" physics system, there are six hard coded parameterised physics systems (such as steam, diesel electric, diesel hydraulic etc) and you basically need to make every train fit one of those boxes (albeit with quite a lot of customisation and tuning possible). The other alternative some TSC developers use is to just use the simplest of those internal models and then basically write a new bespoke physics layer in the LUA scripting to handle the logic. As an example, TSC's hydraulic system can't handle varying numbers and configurations of torque converters and fluid couplings. Simugraph is a modular system that has individual components for each system in the physics setup (various types of motors, torque converters, fluid couplings, fuel tanks, batteries etc) and then these are placed, configured (almost as extensive config on each type of component as TSC has on the entire setup) and wired together in various ways. Simugraph also separately models all the different systems like pneumatics, electronics and so forth. Fixing a physics bug in TSC means basically having to retest every loco ever built using whichever of the 6 models you've changed. In TSW Simugraph, we can just fix that component and up-version it (we have about 6 versions of AC motors now) and that allows the TSW system to have been upgraded and improved steadily and consistently over time where touching TSC's is simply out of the question. Hitching on TSC and TSW are caused by totally different things because of different underlying engines and different methods of working, the fact they're both train simulations is largely irrelevant, they're written *entirely* differently. Matt.
Quick question, in TSW i have noticed some trains re-act different based on the route, as in if i pull a full rake of loaded FKAs (20 wagons) on WCML using a double headed 87 you really feel the weight of the train as you struggle to accelerate, yet the same consist but pulled by a class 66 feels like your pulling nothing, now i know the 66 is a beast, but surely 2 class 87s strip it both in tractive effort and outright HP, you mentioned additional physics maybe added via the .lua is that on a per loco bases or is that a world variable based on what route you have loaded.
There's no LUA on TSW. Would need to see some graphs of the two examples mentioned really to really understand it - it could just be the 66 is loading up faster than the 87's do. One class 66 has the max te of barely just under a pair of 87's, but I suspect a 66 can load up faster. It may also be the 87's are filling the brakes perhaps slower than the 66 so there's a little drag going on. Unsure without checking! Matt.
Thanks for the answer, not sure myself, as for the brakes i normally hold the loco on the loco brake for a good minute after dropping the train brake, usually to allow the consist to stretch out, especially if I'm on an uphill gradient.