Edinburgh-glasgow Preview Stream Feedback Thread

yes but most emus have decent stopping power esp with regen brakes so you can see why people wonder why it looked like it was so hard to stop at times.

 

Overall I think it looks quite good. It’s my local route so possibly a bit biased.

Some nice new features like the selective door opening & I don’t mind the manually triggered announcements, it’s better than silence, although hopefully this can be developed to some auto announcements in future.

The stations look really good, albeit a bit sparsely populated on the scenarios previewed. Glad to hear Rush Hour passengers are implemented.

The train looks good and sounds aren’t bad albeit a couple of things not quite right. Matt mentioned they are trying to work with ScotRail to record these, can we get an update on the next roadmap please?

I hope the platform weather is also implemented too as this is a positive TSW3 change so certainly be a backwards step not to include.

In terms of night time Edinburgh, the castle and station look good but there should be more lit up. The Scott Monument and the buildings on the mound should be lit, as per the attached pics. Just seems very dark.

Overall looking forward to it though. Will probably have more feedback once I have the route….on PS5.

 

But again, they compared it to the real thing and its a match.

If they upped it to be better, then people would moan the the brakes are too good.

 

Saw the stream and I am wondering if you can program the class 385 to announce Cathcart circle destinations or not? This is based on my DB BR425 Bremen Oldenburg experiment since you can sign all German and international destinations on the PIS

 

Jasper said no. It's only specific to Edinburgh to glasgow. But it won't work on other routes.

 

You *might* be able to get the visual destination loaded, Jasper did say there were a few extra ones added, but announcements only apply to Edin-Glas.

 

If they worked this way they could produce some top quality products and should really be considered IMHO[/QUOTE]

If you're ready to pay double the price.

(If the route is twice as long as usually of course)

 

I watched the stream hoping that the small Driver’s window would be less of an issue than I’d imagined. Unfortunately it had the opposite effect. The view really is appalling. There’s not much Rivet can do about that now - it was just an odd prototype to choose for a Driver simulator. The gimmicks don’t interest me, and that seems to be what this route is entirely about, so I’ll be giving it a miss. If it turns up in a sale for £10 or something at some point, I may get it.

 

Watched the stream and I see amateur hour is here once again in so many different areas, despite the 2nd hand car sales pitch.

I was quite hopeful for this but it’s a very hard pass, even in a sale. Many more releases like this and I really fear for the future of TSW3.

 

I would argue that if they suddenly did loads of BR era dlcs, it could be the same way?
Remember they base their routes on what sells, and seeing as the overwhelming majority have been modern, clearly they sell better than you expect.

I know I, for one, would pass on BR Blue era/ german & american stuff, because for me it's uninteresting.

So I would say the same if the next 8 dlcs were all that

 

It’s not the route or the era that are the problem.

It’s the missing features (which should be a given at this point. I mean no wet platforms, really?!!), the piss poor lighting yet again, the ropey sounds, the dead feeling of the route, the now entirely standard one train/Class 66/railtour rubbish that comes with every UK route, the completely ludicrous eye adaption, the procedural grass inexplicably popping up on the track in front of the player, Matt brushing off the dynamic weather not working properly, the AI timetable, having to manually select announcements, no GSM-R, blah blah blah. In effect the usual game of never knowing what you’re going to get when you buy anything TSW related.

They have put elevators and pianos in but the train doesn’t have automated announcements, a GSM-R, realistic sounds or correct physics. That really tells you everything you need to know about how these projects are managed and where the priorities lie. Lets face it, we’re talking about a piano and an elevator being touted as a major feature. It’s hardly ground-breaking now is it? I’ve wanted to see better building interiors, things like moths/birds etc for ages, but I’m surprised it now appears that we need to say that these elements should be additions to the properly done train and route, not instead of.

The whole thing smacks of rampant amateurism. The Rivet representative on the stream knew virtually nothing about the product he’s responsible for and is supposed to be promoting. It’s beyond a joke at this point and yet again, in my opinion, you’re a mug if you buy it.

We all need to stop feeding the TSW troll.

 

I agree, as a Scot, hearing feedback like this is weird, it's not the community's fault though, even if I've not been on the line IRL it is sad to hear this feedback

I expected Rivet to do better as well following the positives of Island Line 2022 last year, but it turns out it is "the Scottish edition of West Cornwall Local", I hope Jasper sees this thread and takes the feedback back to the team to analyse what went wrong and how to improve for next time, but in the end Rivet have made us a route, so good effort to the guys and girls at Rivet Games, the route might not be 10/10 yet but I'm sure they/DTG can fix it over time

 

There are a couple of things they could do to mitigate it, like moving the camera closer, but a big part of the problem is that viewing something on a 2D screen heavily limits your peripheral vision.

 

I can already hear the echo

"VR, VR, VR, VR, VR ... !"

It would fix that issue, tho ... !

 

I am less excited about the route post stream than I was before it, I am still likely to purchase it but not certain yet.

I think the 385 looks nicely modelled in and out as did the route but I don't like the colour of the ballast, if a mod is made to change it that would be a huge improvement. I like the new features although the announcements being manually operated don't really impress me and I doubt I wil bother using them. I like that more of the "world" is modelled and especially the piano on the stations (I wonder if one day we will get London Bridge with its pipe organ). The view from the window didn't look to bad as far as I was concerned, I still think it is a strange design though, the cab must feel very closed in. The sounds seemed okay for me, at least there were running sounds so you got a sense of speed.

There didn't seem to be as much traffic as I expected, if this is reality then fair enough. My main complaint is why use the AI timings? It isn't as if there hasn't been a lot of feedback on these forums about it, why not use timings from the working timetables which are freely available from the Network Rail site?

Overall it was a decent effort but still work needed. I might watch Thursdays streams and think again, I don't think I am worried about missing out on a 10% discount.

 

Anything mentioned about signalling? Approach control modelled? Only watched a bit of the stream.
Did note that they are still using the old unrealistic style speed signage, whenever are we going to get an upgrade on that...
I don't know, it looked nice, but don't think it'll be a day one for me.

 

With all due respect, you’re a fool if you think the 385 shown has realistic brakes.

It should have BETTER braking than the Class 323, which it clearly didn’t. Matt had to use 100% braking on several occasions just to bring the train to a halt, which even then wasn’t slowing the train down quick enough.. Step 2 braking was laughably weak.

Trust me when I say this - the braking physics on the 385 are NOT accurate, despite what Rivet says/wants you to believe.

 

To me this says they got an audio file dump from somwhere and then just programmed it in, without thinking about the placement of those sounds in a game. For some reason Rivet have chosen again to program something they don't know...

Well it says to me that scenery is easier to develop than a train, but I'd kind of guessed that anyway, and we already know that scenic artists aren't the same people as train devs.

Personally I would have hoped that there would be a "GSM-R package" including a standard insert, visual, control and dev package that could be included in the core and then just implemented EVERYWHERE that that model of GSM-R is fitted. I am not overly familiar with GSM-R boxes, but is the one on this unit substantially different to the one in the 377 or 465? If not, make a bog standard one that will do registration, do speaking to the controller and do a driver call the other way and then move on. This piecemeal nonsense does my head in

I imagine automated announcements is actually track related. IRL these announcements are done by GPS I would think, and in game I doubt they've made the train location a thing so this would need triggers on the track (similar to the recent signal trigger markers in the AP signal pack). If DTG haven't included for that in their track suite then this would need to be done first before the triggers could be put into practice. Again, something I would like to see done before a lot of other things (like haggis plushies) but I understand different teams...

 

Why should I trust you over them though?
I see no reason why you should know better about this trains brakes than people who have modelled and/liasied with the company operating the real deal?

Maybe it does have weaker brakes than older units? If it doesn't have cruise control, or other features, then it's not unrealistic really.

It's clearly gone through enough levels of testing and if they've been called out on it once and gone back and checked the real stats to the simugraph, then sure, I WILL take their word for it that it is realistic.

 

I’m chiming in as a member of train crew. I was planning on getting this route day one but after seeing the live stream I’m going to hold off until some changes are made.

• Where to begin? Is there are reason why Dovetail/Rivet refer to the TMS as train monitoring system? Is there a legal or copyright issue preventing from it being correctly referred to as the Train Management System? I’ve uploaded a pic showing that on the 385 (like all Hitachi units) it is referred to as Train Management System.
  
• Sticking with the TMS. The announcements used are the platform announcements. Why is ‘Fast Train Approaching’ an option? Also the tone played before the announcement is just laughably wrong. That’s the old BR platform tones. In reality no tones play before an announcement onboard.
  
• Pedestrian clipping. Early on in the stream you clearly see passengers disembarking and walking over a footbridge. And then see one fall through the stairs. Possibly more a TSW3 engine problem but a bug nonetheless.
  
• The guards panel. An old school BR carriage key can be seen. In reality only your old BR staff will be using those. The majority of staff will be using a standard issue T key, of which I’ve uploaded a picture.
  
• Lack of TSW3 features such as wet platforms and snow build up is disappointing. TSW3 routes are charged at a premium for the new features only for a new route to be missing features isn’t great.
  
• This is more of an observation about the stream and how the devs refer to headcodes - they’re referred to as number letter, number number. As in 1R46 etc. All rail staff I know (guards, drivers, control etc and onboard staff such as myself) would say 1 Romeo 46. It’s an industry wide practice to use the phonetic alphabet.

I think with a few tweaks this could be a great route but for the time being I’ll hold off.

 

Even the DTG devs themselves said that they’re off on a Discord server group which I’m in.

Though I probably won’t convince you seeing as Rivet says everything is fine... Just don’t say I didn’t warn you…

 

You have to keep in mind that in this forum, there is a lot of knowledge and opinion coming from all sides, and sometimes they mix up, and it's not always clear where that information/opinion is coming from. It would be much easier if there would be provided any sort of reference or origin to what people say, like mikec did just a post above.

 

But this is the internet, so people don't have to have facts but can state their opinions...

 

If we want a good product and criticise the product for being inacurate, having some reference or origin for that claim should be provided at all times.

 

If everyone had to provide a bibliography for their statements and opinions we wouldn't have a forum (or a very bloated one) and surely the people who need the tech manuals and references are the devs building the things in the first place.
Personally I would start reading the forum in the voice of some guy fixing his MGB-b if we all had to start quoting the Haynes manual for the class 385 before making any comments and that would just do my head in

 

Would it be that much of a massive undertaking if 'That's not accurate' would come with a link to a file or a page on the internet ? I'm not talking professional levels of quoting and cross references.

Let's give the devs the benefit of the doubt and guess they made the brakes by the references they are given. A single 'That's wrong' won't do anything. But, providing them with actual information about the topic that shows them where they are wrong would in the very least provide them with better information for the next DLC.

 

For some yes... I mean generally if more than two people come back with a point being incorrect it can generally be assumed, but you'll put a lot of people off if you have to give your basis for what you say

That's different when you're talking about giving the devs the info, but in that case they should (note should) already have those things and have used them. Something Rivet have said in the past they don't do or have (when Jasper said they hadn't been to Cornwall or on a class 150 as an example)

 

I thought that was the point of 10 in 10. Whizz through the peripheral stuff so the the main body of the stream can concentrate on the gameplay. I think these “niceties” need to be mentioned and that is a good way of doing it without detracting from the main game. Also, sticking it in between two services/scenarios breaks it up nicely.

 

My full feedback

How very disappointing!

After Rivet’s IoW 2022 release and the positive reaction I initially had when seeing the developer videos of the E to G route, I was really looking forward to buying this route as a day one purchase.

Then came the news that the DLC was delayed for PlayStation users due to a TMS fault found in testing. Not a deal breaker in and of itself, but it once again highlights ineffective testing at DTG for them only to find this issue so close to release. Rushing to get DLC out for arbitrary release dates is never going to result in a polished product.

Now on to the stream itself (which I decided to watch despite the largely negative feedback from the community so far)…

The train model on the whole is exceptional as is the scenery around Edinburgh and the attention to detail within stations. I was and am impressed by the standard shown here and it should really put the pressure on DTG and other 3rd party developers to up their game. DTG started off well, then went really bad (especially on some DLC) and have started to improve again, but I think they still fall short of Rivet’s standards.

The camera could be better positioned within the cab. You seem far too distant from the desk/windscreen.

The train sound seemed ok. I wasn’t overly impressed or disappointed.

New features continue to make brief appearances and then aren’t seen for a while. There is no excuse for this really. Once a new feature is introduced, it should become the standard across all DLC. I’m sick and tired of the game seemingly taking one step forward and two steps back. It’s shoddy to be honest.

There was some very strange lighting effects when entering tunnels.

A lot of stuttering going on. This might have been due to the stream though as I didn’t notice many significant FPS drops.

Unable to fire the 1 o’clock cannon due to performance issues? I consider this to be a total lie. Either that, or Rivet simply don’t have the expertise to make it work. I think it was an oversight and a lame excuse was thought up. If church bells can ring, if AI can sound their horns (RHTT DLC) and the game still works - why not a cannon? It’s simply a different sound effect played in the same way.

Manually operated announcements. Why? A driver would not be expected to faff about with selecting and playing announcements. This is (as it should be) an entirely automated function. It is automated on AI trains, so why not the train being driven? Trying to select the announcements using a PS5 controller is going to be even more of a faff. It’s hard enough selecting switches and other onscreen menu options with the controller. As it stands, this is a completely wanted feature, but one I am unlikely to ever use in game. The announcements were a bit echoey too.

AI based timetables are too unrealistic to be fully enjoyable. I hate having to drive like a lunatic to keep to the schedule. I (and others) have given so much feedback to DTG and Rivet in this area, but in the case of Rivet it is falling on deaf ears. Why put so much detail into the train and the scenery only to hobble things with a crappy AI timetable? It’s always going to be a red flag for me going forward. A human curated timetable (as we’ve seen from JoeTheFish) is far more enjoyable and is clearly doable. Rivet just couldn’t be bothered it would seem. If they can’t be bothered, why should I be bothered to buy or play the route? A one minute set up time still doesn’t feel enough. 2 minutes would be better.

All in all, this route has gone from a potential day one purchase to a guaranteed no buy (even with a discount). I will only consider buying it if the timetable is human curated at some point in the future. However, given Rivet’s track record of fixing issues, I won’t be holding my breath.

Very disappointed to say the least.

 

The "10 features in 10 minutes" was indeed a nice summary, though I did have a chucke at one of the features being "custom assets". I mean is that really a selling point now if a route is not 100% just reused assets?

 

In the long run, it would create a more healthy and construcive discussion environment I think. That doesn't mean opinions or criticism without reference is worth less, especially opinions. But, if you claim something is wrong and another one argues it's correct, how can anyone know who's right if you don't know where they got their information from ?

Well, the devs will get these informatiom through the forum, through our feedback. Isn't that the sole use of the feedback threads and post-stream discussion forums ?

 

Would that be a driver?
And if so, would you be able to state your opinion about the brake authenticity of this new model? Too weak, too strong, or quite right?

I´d be grateful.

 

I asked about signaling during the stream and Jasper had absolutely no clue...which is odd considering he's supposed to be the spokesperson for this during the stream. Anyway, Matt said it's typical UK signaling.

I wonder if the signaling is broken somehow because of that near collision with an AI train in one of the runs.

 

Kangaroo Conductor If this is any interest to you, I was chatting to a ScotRail driver, who actually drives the 385s in real life.

Their claim was that the brakes are NOT accurate. (Far too weak as already mentioned). Also, myself, who has travelled on quite a few of the things in real life, even I can tell that they were off.

The information given to Rivet may have been accurate, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’ve actually set it up correctly in Simugraph. In this case, they haven’t.

 

I’m no expert, but the brakes on the 385 - a modern EMU - seem appalling. I’d fully expect it to slow down quicker than it was doing.

 

Are they automated in the correct places on AI... Must admit I haven't known AI to play announcements (and I don't do passenger mode so that's not surprising) but interested to know if they're "automated" as in properly or just "play a random audio at a random time"

 

Yes, they’re far too weak in TSW. They should be AT LEAST as good as the Class 323 brakes, which they clearly aren’t.

 

I don’t know to be honest.

 

Thank you for telling me this. That's the kind of transparency about the origin of the information I am looking for in a discussion. And I believe that it was no big undertaking to typing that down, additionally.

All I am asking for is a more grounded and reasonable discussion and feedback, as I am sure it will benefit us and them in the long run.

 

Remember when at the beginning trains on Arosalinie kept derailing during braking and Rivet insistent on saying it's realistic that way? Then DTG checked it and turned out the buffer physics were messed up and that caused the derailments.

I wouldn't trust anything that Rivet has to say regarding physics. Now I wouldn't want to sound harsh, but I do think they should double check and fix it if it's really wrong.

 

Erm, no? Really, people still think these forums are so that we as consumers can talk to the people who make the game?
Interesting concept

These forums are partly so people can air their grievance, but mainly so DTG can "harvest" what people are talking about, playing and commenting on and then use that in their NEXT DLC. This is why the devs and forum people don't get involved in the discussions any more. They used to (thinking Sam, Adam and Matt) but they stopped a while back, mainly I think because people took what they said as people and made it sound like DTG policy.

 

Old Chicago news reporter's maxim: "If your mother says she loves you, check it out."

 

Well DTG aren't exactly spotless on this either, including changing buffer physics so trains literally pinged off the rails at scenario load...
All goes back to "you can't beat some live non-dev play testers" (and not like they wouldn't have any takers on that, is it?)

 

Not a driver but work onboard. I’m quite friendly with a few guards and drivers though, and have been in the cab a few times too. Can’t chip in on the brakes sadly.

 

No prob, and thanks anyway.

 

I believe that. People in here tag developers, demand sales, reduced prices, fixes, and any other type of change or feature or suggestion. Where's the point in that if I'd never reach the developers ? This forum is made and supported by the developer aswell.

Yes, people air their frustration, rightfully ! But if you want the next DLC to be better, it has to reach them at some point ?

And them not taking part in it doesn't mean they don't see it, threads in here are often referenced in livestreams. And third party devs like Jasper from Rivet and Maik from TSG take part in here, too.

 

What people do, and what they get from it are two different things. I've not seen any route suggestion directly determining a route made, I've seen fix posts result in fixes, but generally... nope
What's the point? See my footer... People like to talk and like to FEEL like they're involved. My point relates to whether that involvement results in any output or not

Doesn't seem to be working. We've got modders on here who have literally offered to give DTG their work to use, who have done so in the past and will do so again, but it's not happening. And those are people willing to directly contribute. Shouting into the void can be cathartic but isn't necessarily useful in the larger scheme

Again, yes. But again, what's the result? Incorrect OHLE, incorrect sounds, incorrect braking physics... Oh and changing the destination displays on the GSM-R?!?
When people here are almost begging for realism and things working properly we don't get it
When people are almost begging for more populated stations we get more stations with nothing in them
When people are almost begging for better track, populated scenery, in cab functions which work, rain or snow on the platforms (I coudl go on ad nauseum) are we seeing these things in game?
NOPE

 

Talking of which, Rivet have somehow made the signals look WORSE than the usual TSW offerings…

Ridiculous sized and low resolution flares from the signals. The actual signals emit very little light luminance, as they’re still using TSW 2 values. So as you approach the signals, and see behind the flare, it looks like the signal is unlit.

Luckily, if you’re a PC player, I can fix both of these issues with mods. You’ve probably seen my invitation thread, for DTG to use my new signal visuals, but this is only a ‘maybe, if we get time’ at this stage, unfortunately

 

Good overall effort by Rivet, but TSW developers and partners *really* need to set correct priorities at the start of projects. Let’s get train physics, sounds, and the basic stuff like TSW3 features and accurate (non AI) timetables nailed down and fully tested first. Then, if there’s still time, novelty things like pianos and working lifts can be tacked on. Apologising for the lack of basic TSW3 features because they ran out of time looks poor when they’re proudly announcing magic pianos in the main stations in the same breath. Sorry guys but it has to be said.