First I wanna preface that I'm relatively new here and haven't posted a lot here. On a lot of threads where the topic of US content (or in this case, the opinion among many that there isn't enough of it), one thing that I haven't seen anybody talking about is older US content, stuff from the 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s. Any reason why DTG hasn't given us anything from those time periods? Because I think there are a lot of routes and engines from the so-called fallen flags that I wish were in the game. There's gotta be at least a dozen railroads that operated through the Chicago area alone that would provide worthwhile content. I've seen people talk about licensing issues, does that apply to defunct railroads as well?
A few reasons. 1. The only vintage US route we got didn't sell well. The CRR was THE lowest selling and lowest played routes for TSW2 when it originally released, because of this, it was promptly dropped, never saw any really post release content or any new vintage US routes, there was the ATSF F7, but DTG kind of dropped the ball heavily on that. Matt is supposed working on a fix for it, but no ETA of arrival as its a personal project. 2. Research and access, this has been something Matt has repeated multiple times, but they cant get "sufficient" recordings and data for vintage equipment, even if it exists due to reasons as "Not being able to record it at track speed etc." So they dont go that route, but at Commuter operations who have allowed access, or in the case of LIRR, outsourced sounds from a reliable source. 3. Licensing doesn't really effect much, just a handful of railroads where the licensing gets odd. Mainly the Milwaukee Road (Which is own by the Milwaukee Road Historical Association) and Conrail (Which still exists as Conrail Shared Access Operations or CSAO) and DTG hasn't dealt with either of these groups yet or they expired. Most other licensing can trace back to the existing Class 1 railroads, and most aside from the 2 Canadian ones (CPKC and CN) are open to it.
There is a Santa Fe game play dlc coming from HIS will be 1990s warbonnet C40 8W and blue and yellow scheme. SD40 2 etc for Cajon pass route.if that can be well recieved then hopefully in future more dlc or routes could be done of older US trains ,I defiantly would like for more classic older trains in US in TSW
They've said the older stuff doesn't sell well, in general not just the US. It's been a bone of contention among the forum. The TSW player base is not the TSC player base. There's nothing stopping third parties from developing the content, except that they often develop for TSC instead because there's more of an audience there. And to be fair there IS a lot of older US routes and locos. Loving the old Penn Central stuff.
Exactly this. DTG: "People don't want old things." Customers: "We can't wait for the CRR remaster." The fact that Blackpool Branches and WCML Preston to Carlisle are two of the best selling TSW routes ever released, shows that backdated routes are popular.
Both are by Just Trains, not DTG. And "a small number of people" said they want a CRR remaster. Not most customers. Although it IS getting a remaster off the clock by a devoted DTG staffer. It's unfair to say "DTG" has abandoned it either since they also own TSC and that's full of content. TSW is a different game with a different playerbase, with some bit of overlap.
You are absolutely right. My point is that after NTP and TVL, DTG moved away from backdated routes citing low sales and lack of interest in historic and vintage routes... Just Trains proved DTG wrong with Blackpool Branches and WCMLoS. TLDR - DTG are leaving backdated content to third-party developers in TSW, and are not interested in releasing any themselves at this point.
It's worked for TSC. DTG has gotten mostly out of the business of new routes and left it open to third parties, who have come up with some great stuff. As a result the "cost" to DTG is lower without having to develop their own routes, and what they have devoted to it has been "bug" fixes and maintenance, meaning TSC is overall less buggier than TSW. Now that also means no new "game features" but having fewer things to "break" means a more solid experience and the third parties just create around the framework DTG provides in TSC. So as I said, they're different in many ways. TSW is really focused on the modern and "new" (features and content) while TSC does have a more solid focus on a stable game, reliable game engine and less "features." Content is basically whatever third parties want to include. Just Trains and the BPO/Carlisle setting are also a factor compared to say Clinchfield or Sherman Hill. For starters, it's Just Trains so it's high quality. They have a good reputation. You get a lot of content. Second, it's British meaning you have a bigger player base. Relatively few US fans compared to the whole use base. Third, it's electric and passenger focused. Yes there are freight too, but there's NO passenger stuff on the US freight routes (Sherman, Clinchfield, Cajon Pass) so you get ZERO passenger players on those. On BPO and Carlisle you get some of both. Finally, it's 1989 not the 1970s or 1960s. To me that's a pretty big difference. It's basically 1990s which in my mind is "modern." People can disagree and it's a personal opinion, but those "feel" more modern than CRR, SOS or PFR. While steam is of course "old" even the class 20 or 37, 40, 45.... they're "old" too. Even if the Class 87 was from maybe 1975, it's "modern" (electric and looking much like it's successors and other "familiar" stock to modern players) and the Pacer is even familiar enough to a fan of the German DMUs. It just feels like people wanting "older stuff" in TSW or "US Freight" or whatever they happen to like are fighting the current. It already EXISTS in TSC and it's pretty dang good. So DTG is already hosting it. Likewise, there's relatively less "modern" content in TSC. There's some, like there's some freight in TSW... but it's not the focus. Asking them to go against their focus to recreate in totally different system just seems like a huge demand. I get it... console players would need a computer to access TSC since it's PC only, but that's still demanding a lot from developers because you don't want to spend a few bucks and get a cheap computer. (TSC is not hugely graphics intensive)
I think Clinchfield suffered from being too slow-paced and having freight only. The awful night-lighting and wonky AI pathing didn't help either. I'm very much looking forward to the remaster. A vintage US mixed-traffic route would be amazing IMO. We already have the F7 in-game, so it wouldn't be too hard to create one of the passenger F-variants. A route like Horseshoe Curve might be a good candidate for back-dating as the mainline at least hasn't changed a ton over the years, and we already have a PRR version in TSC for reference. Altoona was crazy busy back in the day- especially with the shops and loco works. There's also the option of doing something like a vintage NEC, though that would be a lot more work. GG-1 though, would be pretty dope! Edit: the recent Boston-Springfield route in TSC would be another good one to port to TSW.
The up coming Santa fe gameplay dlc if well received. Could start a trend leading to these types of DLC to existing TSW routes ..They could add modern day CSX to clinchfield ..or add retro Chessie System B&O to sand patch grade..be neat to get retro Conrail paks for HSC Penn Central and PRR,,they have retro Penn Central paks for Boston and albany and New Haven Springfield routes in TSC i have them and they add more playability to those routes.
A few thoughts. Well that really stinks. At least I did my part by buying it, but, are we sure that it didn't sell poorly because it was a relatively obscure US route, and that a more well-known line like the New York Central, the Pennsylvania, or the Santa Fe wouldn't have sold better? This I had heard about, which leads to a few other questions. First, we have at least one model from EMD's GP series (the 38-2), SD series (40-2), and F series (the F7), as well as GE's DASH line. Do other engines from those series sound all that different from each other? Because I would love to see some early high-hood GP models, like the GP7 and GP9. I once put together a wishlist of every US engine I'd love to see in the game, and I ended up writing down most of the GP and SD series units to make sure all my favorite liveries were included, and believe me, there are a lot of them haha But if DTG is adamant on accurate, provable sound effects, does that mean we're never going to see engines of which there are no surviving examples (Damn you, Alfred Pearlman for scrapping all the Hudsons), engines that are not practical to restore (UP GTELs), or engines that are not safe to restore (GG-1 electrics)? I take it this is why Conrail wasn't included in the Norfolk Southern Heritage pack, does that also have anything to do with why we only get the GEVO models and not the SD70ACe units?
The GG1 traction sound wouldn’t (I hope) be hard too hard to recreate it’s just basically any old DC traction sound with massive sounding Blower
You would have to ask Skyhook on that, after they released the GEVO Heritage Pack, they ditched all their US content and focused on other things.
Since we have the F7, the problem here is probably more the coaches. I'm not that knowledgeable about passenger stuff. Probably quite a few types of coaches needed. Oh, the mere thought of driving that beauty in TSW... That's one reason I specifically called out in the survey in regards to the Milwaukee Road's electric locos - traditional electric locos don't sound all that different from each other - mostly booming cooling fans and electric buzzing and motors. If no original recording can be made/used, it shouldn't be that hard to modify other sources to fit the bill.
Some of the replies here, particularly those talking about the possibility of creating additional content off the existing F7 model, makes me think of another question, when DTG adds new engines or rolling stock into the game, do they start completely from scratch or do they work with existing models? Obviously they could just give the F7 another paint job if they wanted to give it to more railroads, but there are other similar looking models I wouldn't mind seeing added to the game, the F3, the FL9, perhaps even the E8. I would also love to see the old F40PH and SDP40F in some Amtrak DLC. How hard (never mind how likely) would they be able to add them to the game?
Depending, the CRR SD40 for example was made from the CSX SD40-2 as it kept referencing it in the menus and such (It also worked for achievements too) Though its unknow if the F40 models were new or built off the old Caltrain one. If DTG gets better references, then they can build a new model. For example the Metrolink MP36 was a completely new model, and not from the old Caltrain one. One could say DTG could easily make a GP9 by modifying the existing GP9RM to restore the hi-nose and such, or the GP38-2 into a GP39-2 or GP40-2, with some minor exterior modeling changes needed between the units. Its just that they now set the bar so high with their passenger stock, that if they cant get better sounds or cab references, they probably wont go that route because its not good enough for the community. (Apparently DTG actually guess the interior of a cab of one the freight locos in game)
most models have similar engines inside for example the F7 has the same engine as a GP9 GP 7 also most of the SD40 models etc have some variations of the EMD 645 engine powering them ,GE s Had FDL variant prime movers ..on EMD s there were turbocharged and non turbo ,example a gp38 2 is non tubochaged ,while a SD40 2 is turbocharged ,
It's a frustrating dilemma. I don't want them to sacrifice the quality that access provides (the Amtrak and Metrolink equipment in the game is really well done compared to most of the freight stuff), but i'm not sure that throwing their hands up in defeat as they've done is the right course either. I also think the community might need to allow for a little flexibility with some aspects. E.g. iirc the SD-70ACE in Sherman Hill uses remixed Class 66 engine sounds because they were unable to access the actual unit. You know what, i'm fine with that- i'd rather have it in the game with some compromises than not at all. I think the biggest improvements for freight gameplay don't even require access (and this isn't limited to US content)- quick example- why don't players have the ability to connect/disconnect the gladhands and use the anglecocks? Maintaining the trainline is a huge part of railroading and it's almost completely absent from TSW.
Yeah, but I'm not a fan of cross-era anachronism routes. Despite it having been practically given away in various sales, I have never bought DLGW for that reason; and although I do have the Santa Fe F7 I don't use it on Cajon, I just use it as a livery model.
Right but they've specifically said that community displeasure with them not always using accurate sounds was a part of why US freight isn't really in active development. Similarly with cab references, etc. They don't forsee the equipment access issue changing anytime soon, so they've decided to prioritize developing with the partners that do give them access, which means Amtrak, Metrolink, and MBTA- not freight operators. I've always wondered why they don't use Amtrak equipment as the base for other stuff. Like Amtrak's GE B32-8WH, which uses the frame from the B40-8W, which was operated by ATSF, though it had a similar, but more powerful engine (without the HEP unit). It would be right at home in the upcoming Santa Fe gameplay pack.
This has been my thought process as well, would rather have an engine with a few inaccurate sounds than not have it at all.
The class 66 has a engine thats similar to US SD70M models .and it sounds decent for the SD70ace in game i am also ok with that also , i got the free Sherman hill route for my recently purchased ps5 .got the free tsw5 starter , and got SPG ,HSC ..will get the other US freight content first to add to my PS5 ,,i already have all US stuff on my x box series x since i preciously had x box 1x with tsw content..but i am kicking off TSW5 on PS with US freight first ..
And how exactly is the community supposed to indicate that they would approve of inaccurate sounds if accurate sounds were unable to obtain? They can't really, which is very convenient for DTG.
It is very convenient and I believe that it's being used as an excuse for not releasing new freight content. DTG seem quite content to insert existing locos and rolling stock into commuter routes. So why not use them in new routes? Route information is not that difficult to find and surely they have plenty of data in their back catalog from both TSW and especially from TSC.
And how are they supposed to do that if no "trains with synthesized sounds" are released? How are they supposed to police every single user's reaction?
