Feather River Canyon - Enhanced

I assume you're talking about Mr Schnauz? I didn't watch the whole video, there's no way I'm watching an hour long review of a route I'm not considering to buy anyway, but from the description alone it's safe to assume that it wouldn't be a fair review.

From an outsider's point of view, who probably won't be buying the route until it's at a significant discount multiple years in the future, it's a very good looking route, with some mediocre stock and some inaccuracies I'm not particularly bothered by. I don't think it's worth the price, even discounted, but even if it was ten times better I still wouldn't think it would be worth the money as I'm a bit of a cheapskate and I don't want to buy something I don't think I'll play.

 

But I thought those people were the small minority, eh?

I'd argue it's much worse. That review only went into how bad the idea of the payware enhancements are (which they are). The community route enhancements made by such users as Chillsnthrills and dieselmatt which are freeware are much better routes with much better looking assets than FRCE.

What that review didn't touch on is how poor a model of the WP the route is, and it didn't really comment on the lazy trackbuilding of the new section, which I think deserved more of a spotlight of the general effort went into the route. Yes, the scenery is decent(except west of James), but a lot of areas(most notably Williams Loop) look far worse than the freeware extension released on RWA years ago. The assets used suck for the most part, the buildings in the Greagle area are quite nice as is the new 2d tree used on the original section, but the rest of the assets are pretty bad, especially the water assets.

The AI treegen looks okay for the most part-except for in the heart of the canyon. In the last decade, much of the canyon has burned in one fire or another(mostly in the Camp Fire of 2019), and the AI didn't place trees over most of the firescars, and nobody ever touched them up, so much of the canyon is far too barren for what it looked like in the 70s.

The stock is awful, both in terms of quality and era. As I mentioned in the post about the scenarios, the only engines in theis pack that ran alongside each other in the supplied schemes are the GP9s and GP35, which would of run with all the other stock in one scheme or another. The problem with this is that there is no WP road power that can run together, and there is only one good paint to allow this, the U30B in pearlman green. Most of the stock is available as either better models or better paints as either freeware or payware elsewhere.

The only thing good about the route is the overall feel-it does feel like the area, and portola looks really good. But that doesn't at all make up for all of the things it doesn't do well or gets wrong.

I'd argue that meticulous deletion and censorship of comments saying anything other than "this route is the best" and "we love you, HIS!" is much more of calculated hit job than a single youtube review. Doesn't help when the developer is a [self-censored, so DTG doesn't have to do it] to everyone who disagrees with him in the slightest, has massive ego issues, and has a personal squad who bullies everyone into submission/reports every post which says anything even vaguely negative.

 

Doesn't matter, you're not allowed to criticize anything HIS does anymore, whatever Gary does is 100% perfection. And his crew deserve nothing but praise and all your hard earn money. Buy everything he makes! Otherwise you are a whiny rivet counter who doesn't appreciate anything Gary or DTM does for TSC.....

 

I never take any notice of reviews as you could get a reviewer who reviews a type of game that they don't like so of course they are going to give it a bad score. Yes, this happens.

 

I learned to wait for discounts.
I splurged a bit when I was new, then realized a lot of stuff is eventually 50% off.
Built such a collection that's enough for 30-50 years at the pace I'm doing. Do I need anything right now?
(On top of the menus already crumbling under all that content.)
Pretty sure a lot of people are the same, maybe with slightly different arguments.

 

This means the full price super duper ultra realistic hyper accurate DLC advertised by HIS didn't meet its expected 14 days sale target?

HIS' attitude and the licking of HIS over at some other board where he apparently has a commercial interest is really what keeps me from buying any of HIS stuff at full price. Plus the guys attitude to present or future customers of his products. There are still errors in one of the locomotives, where HIS probably has messed up the paths, which is sort of a trademark of him already.

Come Summer Sale or Thanksgiving/X-Mas Steam sale the route will be 50% off, the right price for the small extension and improvements made over the original. We'll see, as any steam DLC bought-refunded-kept-shared quickly washes up on the shores of those distant bays ...

The abundance of covered hoppers in the provided consists makes me wonder, did WP really have that many?

 

They had roughly 250 of the type the included car is attempting(rather poorly I might add) to model.

Rule of thumb on this route’s scenarios, if it’s there it’s most likely not realistic in the slightest.

 

So much for a "loyalty" discount. Now everyone gets it!

I'll wait for at least 50% off. Might be the lowest he goes.

 

You're literally proving Mfeets point you realize? I (not having purchased the route tbf) don't think it looks as bad as some detractors say, but you lot could really do a hell of a lot better than just constantly berating everyone who doesn't like or doesn't own HIS products, shame.

 

I don't see any "censorship" of negative/critical opinions going on here, just some (mostly) respectful disagreement.
I'm not sure of the value of repeatedly making the same points, whether positive or negative, but that is arguably a wider problem with social media.

 

So glad i don't know about any of this drama lol

 

Just silliness. You either buy the DLC or you don’t. Knowledge and constructive criticism is good. Unconscious bias and trolling is not.

Respectfully

 

I think all this fuss just shows that different people look for different things in DLC. I think the scenery and feeling of the area is excellent and the racing upland streams are the best simulated I've seen in TSC so far. Other's think differently. That's diversity in action.

What I don't like is the idea being promoted that this is some kind of monstrous crime against simulation that people are being forced to accept. It certainly isn't. If you don't like it, just pass it by. If the freeware version mentioned above is great, then use that; though I suspect if it was that good then this DLC would not have been made.

Are there mistakes in the DLC? Yes of course, but that's the nature of simulation, nothing is ever 100% correct, no matter how hard you try. The only way you will properly experience what it was like to be an engineer on the WP in the 70s, is to, err, have been an engineer on the WP in the 70s. Rudeness to developers will not change that.

 

As long as the developer acknowledges the issues and works to fix them.

 

The developer need not rectify what they have created. It is their choice and their reputation. Buyer beware of the goods purchased. It is good to support DLC creators especially in a product which is waining. If the community scorns every DLC marketed in Steam then we are just promoting the demise of the platform.
Respectfully

 

Given who the developer is, I reckon the likelihood of this it smaller than my shoe size. But we will see.

 

Expecting and demanding people purchase subpar products 'for the good of the platform' like you are doing just accelerates the decent to mediocrity.
Respectfully

 

I do not understand the use of the word ‘demanding’. Bottom line is I thought this was a good DLC. I have run all of the scenarios. I own at least 80% of all TSC and TSW Steam sold routes. In my opinion this is one of the better packs. I am no expert in train design or consist quality. I bought the pack and am happy.

Respectfully

 

That's the only thing that matters, player satisfaction.

I'd happily bought the extended/upgraded route at a reasonable upgrade price without the rolling stock.

Again a plea to DTG to de-bundle the Kuju heritage/stock/mediocre rolling stock that is included to make the route playable to new customers.
Like many other players, I have most of the USA locomotives and rolling stock, a lot already duplicate since it is included in different routes.

 

Given they are updating the core game right now, I don't see this happening anytime soon. However, I do agree that removing duplicates and putting oft-used locos and stock in the core game would be beneficial. That said, there comes to be one small problem; Workshop scenarios using the stock in the various duplicated locations. One will use the Class 37 in Guildford (old PDL), another will use the RSC Class 37, yet another will use the Edinburgh-Glasgow 47, and a fourth will use the Kuju. They would have to put every single duplicate into the core package, creating folders in all locations anyway, to counter this fact. Which they won't. And I don't blame them given the amount of testing involved to make sure the Frankensteined rearrangement still works.

 

The majority of the people who buy this myself included couldn't care less what rolling stock it has. As long as the scenarios work that is all that they / I care about.

 

At first glance, path overriding (a very dynamic loco / asset swap) would help, but then there is another issue of differences between theoretically identical models (say, the GE ES44AC variants). Not just physics, even the model for reskins.

 

Think of it as buying a car and replacing the wheels, tires, exhaust system, upgrading the radio and adding speakers, pinstripes, fuzzy dice on the mirror, and a hula girl on the dash. Make it yours.....

 

Forget that. TSC is not a centralized development, like Run 8 for example. Each author can choose what stock to use in their route, and make modifications as he wishes. There's good reasons for that which outweigh the fact that you may have duplicate stock. How you organise it or keep track of all is up to you, like you'd care for your own model railway.

What happens when you are using shared libraries - specifically changing to shared libraries later - can be seen with Just Trains' CommonLibrary. Install an older JT route later on and you'll get loose older files added to the folder that override the .ap content - leading to issues. Each time I see an issue report concerning JT, I think "I know exactly what to do", but I'm tired of doing so as it is very hard to guide inexperienced users through the (fairly simple when you know it) process by exchanging posts. A TeamViewer session is what would be more helpful.

The duplicate stock is a result of the freedom TSC gives to the devs. You can update stock in a specific route without affecting other routes (could break scenario timings etc.) and it lessens DLC requirements, an important selling factor.

The structure will not change. This would be a complete disaster and break all compatibility. This is too fundamental to change later on, especially with the amount of content based on the asset provider/product system for 16 years.

They made one small change many moons ago, as it was foreseeable that the amount of assets would grow massively so instead of the game being one big assortment of files, they were split into separate DLC depots, so they introduced the asset preload system (the tickboxes in the editor). Previously, the game would scan scenario.bin and load whatever was demanded - then, the requirements where predefined in the ScenarioProperties.xml.

One effect of that change was the Fort Kent Black Walls - a preloaded asset folder (3DTrains\ScaleRoads) itself referencing another provider (RSDL\IslandLine) in a traffic blueprint - hidden to the preloader as it was nested - boom, the model files were not correctly processed due to the DRM system failing. (Any GeoPcDx that is not correctly preloaded will fail to decrypt as it must be preprocessed. People that didn't have IslandLine were not experiencing the bug, as the cars defined in the traffic bp were just not there for them.) -> It would have been safe to create duplicates of the cars and ship them in the ScaleRoads folder themselves - you get the point of shared asset problematics.

That "mistake" was on 3DTrains, but at that time they could not foresee the core changes (and even if, all they could have done is to tell each route author to manually tick the RSDL\IslandLine provider if they used their traffic.)

One must never underestimate the impact a small change can have on a simulator that big. Especially structural changes. Like a broken shortcut on your desktop.

We can work on how the given data is processed (engine), but must not touch the way the data (content) is organised, this can only be done in an early stage of game development where content is overseeable and can be patched accordingly, that's what DTG did when taking over the sim from Kuju. Split it into DLC, which is their business model and also guaranteed the game not suffering under the huge load of data (800 GB here) - the centralized ScenarioDataBase cache was introduced in TS2014 iirc. Before the game was just browsing through the content folder - which would now take as long as it takes to rebuild the SDBCache.bin - in my case 15 minutes. They put a lot of thought into the way the game handles the amount of content (causing Steam to go offline once, as Matt proudly stated "We were the first game to kill Steam").

I see people complaining about the amount of DLC, would they complain in a model railway store that they're offering too much to choose from? The whole concept is to "make it your own personal game" by being able to choose what to buy and what not.

If I went slightly off topic bear with me, sometimes my ADHD kicks in (though the H doesn't apply to me, being more of a quiet dreamer with thousands of associations running through my brain permanently...)

 

Hi Spikee!

Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but...

Now that I see you own it, does Feather River Canyon Enhanced install as a new, separate route from the old Feather River Canyon route? I wouldn't mind having both in my library, as I've got a lot of Workshop content for the original version.

Thanks!

 

Yes. New seperate route.

 

The tracks are not quite aligned. I asked the author about converting their existing added scenarios being ported over from old to new. They stated that they were not currently compatible.
Respectfully

 

I would not presume the scenarios for the existing route work on the new one. You can test it with a full run scenario, but don't commit your entire Feather River Canyon Workshop folder to it yet.

Here is how to test. I will presume scenarios are already installed to the folder from the Workshop, or you have otherwise extracted them manually (like I do) from the area to which they download.

1. Find the scenario you want to run on the new version of the route.
2. If you are subscribed to that scenario, UNSUBSCRIBE.
3. Look for the SCNR ID and search for that within 00000062-0000-0000-0000-000000002016\Scenarios\
4. MOVE that folder to a place outside of your folder.
5. Launch the game, wait for it to finish updating the database, and immediately exit.
   
6. Find the e0732f85-e0c6-434f-aca7-dba57e488a90\Scenarios\ folder and drag the removed scenario into there.
7. Launch the game, load the scenario, and see if it works.

Note that I have determined you have to MOVE the folder because I have tried moving Castle Rock Raioroad scenarios to the Workshop version of the route previously, and wondered why they weren't moving to the new route. When I followed this procedure, they then appeared. You might be able to circumvent a launch by rebuilding your scenario database, which involves deleting certain files and is already a documented procedure for other fixes (SDBCache is one, I believe).

If you do not know what the SCNR ID is, see below.



Notice I chose a Castle Rock Railroad example. The Workshop version of this route adds a fuel point to Monument. Provided a scenario does not use that fuel point, it can actually be copied to the old version of the route (if a player wishes) by copying from 85e59955-ee4d-41f4-bfbd-b84444e53a1a with my example to the correct folder (00000006 followed by all the zeroes).

Let's assume now that you have not subscribed yet to a scenario you want to play. Here is another method to put scenarios in the new route.

1. Find a scenario in the Workshop for the old route.
2. Subscribe to the scenario.
3. Go to Steam\steamapps\workshop\content\24010\########## (the pounds represent the Workshop ID).
4. Open the file inside (most work with 7Zip, but the oldest uploads are BIN files and require WinRAR to open) and drag the Content folder somewhere handy. (This is the method I use to create a backup archive of various collections of scenarios with no scenario corruption, which can happen when the game installs Workshop scenarios; I then open them all in the regular menu instead of the Workshop menu.)
   
5. Close the archive and unsubscribe from the scenario in the Workshop.
6. Open the Content and Routes folders.
7. Change "00000062-0000-0000-0000-000000002016" to "e0732f85-e0c6-434f-aca7-dba57e488a90".
8. Drag the Content folder into your RailWorks directory. Merge when prompted.

Provided you don't already have the same folder under the original route by accident, the new scenario should open in the updated route and be visible under "Official" scenarios instead of "Workshop" scenarios.

For anyone who wants to test this, here are 175 Feather River Canyon scenarios to choose from for testing. I do not think they will work here, however.

EDIT: By the way, does anyone have and remember the old DPS version of the PDL? Try removing the Scenarios folder (leave a blank folder) from "0f090cba-2f1e-4110-a0c2-2ac143b943d3" using method 1 above, then after the launch and exit, install Portsmouth Direct Line Updated and try moving the entire Scenarios folder you just pulled into "5c29320b-531a-4e04-9cf1-533e0f0de51e". I do not know yet if this works and plan to test it since the new route uses the DPS route as a base. Some scenarios might work straight away. some may not at all, and others might work after being resaved in the editor. Might be worth testing original route scenarios, too. I will draw the line at trying on the Waterloo version of the route, however, since there are tracks in these versions that are removed from that one.

 

Thanks!

 

I hadn't planned on being able to use the original workshop routes on the new Enhanced version of Feather River Canyon, but thanks for this wonderful explanation on how to try! In time, I will do some experimenting based on the procedure you have explained above!

 

While Castle Rock Railroad examples (and Hedborough, and Seebergbahn) might work via this procedure - as would London to Brighton and South London Network on Danny's "South London to Brighton", or Hamburg to Hanover possibly working on another Danny merge in "Hamburg to Lubeck and Hannover", and many similar merges - I have a suspicion some track might have been rebuilt and scenarios might not work for FRC Enhanced. Some might be made to work using the editor to repath all trains, but I cannot guarantee this. Trains can be repathed by editing something with the train and the game will redraw the path. However, if a path just can't be read, the scenario might just crash on editor load, and then you know there's nothing you can do to make that scenario work AFAIK.

 

The simple test is to create a very basic scenario for the original route and to then convert it to the enhanced version and see what happens.

 

Yes, or find a very simple scenario to take over. I could probably find some good candidates once I find the enhancement at 50% off. Want to check in RWInfo too as it might tell me whether the names are even the same...wait, that gives me an idea, I found new route scenarios in the Workshop...

EDIT: Back to report that I checked a trainman4 scenario and it featured several trains in passing sidings that should be on the original map, but do not appear. Only one I matched up in the first few was Oroville Depot. This telle me that, even if some scenarios copy over to the new route, there are new labelled sections in the original route. As a result, it makes me think this was done from the ground up or rebuilt, and that old scenarios would not work. But I may be wrong. I may still test this. Putting trains in various named locations would be a proper test to then take over, but I'll examine some FRC scenarios against the new route once I have it as I've already set 11 groups of scenarios aside, including 19 by trainman4.

And BTW, if it WAS done from the ground up, I see why they are charging full price. So even just grabbing the list of FRC locations from RWInfo would be enough of a comparison. I wonder if someone with the new route, and RWInfo, has that list?

 

Don't waste your energy. Althoug it is the same location, it is technically a different route with a different network and tracks.bin is not compatible with DTG FRC. Scenarios are not interchangeable. FRE will get its own bunch of WS scenarios, don't worry. And it's good for doing own freeroams.

 

There is nothing enhanced about it. Only have to watch Schnauza's YT review.

 

Come on. That review is nothing but a nit picky hit job on some people he doesn't like.

 

There is a whole new section of rail. If that isn’t enhancement then….

 

I suppose strictly speaking that's an extension, but my understanding is that the original section of the route has been upgraded as well.

 

Do you have the route? I assure you it has enhancements of various sorts along its whole length.

If you base your judgement on reviews that are clearly not objective, then more fool you.

 

Technically it cannot be called an extension since the original rail layout has been 'enhanced'.

 

Still

His obvious bias and disdain for HIS shows in his review both in his YT video and his review on Steam. I purchased it an much enjoy it.
Waiting for DTG to release the patches for FRCE. Route released Feb 15. 2 months and still no initial patch.

 

Agreed. Schnauz' videos are heavily biased (I used to like his earlier videos), and he often reviews routes from an aerial perspective which is not how they are meant to be seen. It's a train simulator simulating a corridor of scenery along the tracks, not ArmA.

And I own both routes, saying there's nothing enhanced is nothing but a lie, which seems as deliberately aiming to do damage to HIS because of personal grudges.

And we should all be aware that TSC's glory days are over. Expect less new releases. Commercially, TSW is more interesting for devs (even Alan Thomson who has long been dismissing TSW is now working on a TSW route - though it will take some time, ATS are known for announcing stuff but never finishing, primarily hosting other modders' work), so we should appreciate any dev making content. Then take it or leave it based on our preferences. Like Maik Goltz said, something like Konstanz-Villingen will not come again, as it makes no economical sense for that small TSC market, you're putting more work into the project than the customers are willing to pay for.

So look out for the freeware community, who can produce high quality because they're having daytime jobs to feed them, taking their time and passion for hobby projects without deadlines. Minerman146's Bergen County Line took 8 years to finish. One of the best pieces of content for TS with a surprisingly efficient way of depending on only a few DLC assets, yet resulting in gorgeous detailed scenery - as opposed to some route creators who have all their providers\products ticked in the world editor, resulting in an asset hunt for the end user and then still having missing scenery because of stuff the author had copied into the Kuju folders, and forgotten about their source.

 

As an option, two routes by Tomcat, Cajon-Mojave and Powder River Basin are both excellent routes but unfinished. Adding more finished areas, basically adding scenery, track has been laid. Things like this would be excellent projects. Assets are curated and available. Developers such as Machine Rail, Diesel Workshop, both payware and DSGDDR, donationware are making excellent content. Searchlight Simulation seems to have gone a bit quiet and have left some projects unfinished. By all means support these freeware developers with a donation if possible.

 

Literally today...


Though SS still hasn't done much with the UP AC44, which at this point is long overdue (I feel bad for those that pre-ordered it)

 

This is good to know. I'm glad you have already analyzed this so I don't waste my time.

I would not be expecting an announcement anytime soon. Not until within a month of the release date. Which I can announce is...sometime in the future. And the route is...somewhere in the world. Does this help?

Seriously, I have exactly four guesses where the route is, but we won't see which one it is until we have a product announcement. And we don't know how they are getting along with the project. Or if it's even started. But DTG has a tighter grip on TSW, so content would most likely have to go through DTG, meaning no site releases by them like with TSC and having to abide by all DTG licenses instead of creating bumblebee 185s.

He said "enhancement". Yes, it is an extension. Whether it's an enhancement is up to the user's view.

 

The ATS pack is in production, but don't expect anything public for a few months if not more.

 

One mans hatchet job is another mans truth. Changing a few trees and chucking some rusty rail lengths trackside is not what i call enhanced. Wouldn't be so bad, if it had been enhanced as freeware by someone in the community. Which i might add there are many much better route examples in that category.

 

The changes in reality, went much deeper than your description. Unfortunately, unless you purchase it and experience it you can only take someone else's opinion on it. An opinion is one thing, an informed opinion has weighted value.

 

Seems kind of unfinished and not something anyone would want. Or am I missing something ?

 

It hasn't been released as of yet. As to being unfinished, no one out side of Searchlight Simulations has posted any information about it. If is as good as their other products I'm sure it will be worth it. Caveat: Value is determined by the individual. In any case, this is off topic.