One of the way TSW 3 can expand on its gameplay for the future is by incorporating a route builder, but for PC exclusively. But to make sure console simmers don’t miss out, DTG should try to look into a Download Station, a in-game built downloader for routes and assets to be downloadable, just like a LD/Scenario downloader, consolers would be able to gain access to routes being built by PC players if uploaded to this “Download Manager/Download Station” and in fact some owners may be able to choose if the route in itself is freeware or payware, with the payware routes being featured among the routes already being sold in the store. This gives a whole layer of potential routes for train sim world 3 for both PC and Console players, like a flight sim marketplace where players can get access to a plethora of content, and DTG can still benefit from partner programmes, along with there being a true route builder. It would function as a Steam Workshop custom built for TSW 3 only for all platforms to get access to routes (e.g trainz). What are your thoughts on this suggestion and do you think it would work
Sounds like a nice idea in my book. I would love to make a route for the sim just to test out different locos...yes yes some would say "The Training Center is like a test route." But wouldn't it be nice if you could make your own fictional test route? Overall if it was implemented correctly I personally say it would work. That's my take on it.
Given how much more indepth TSW3 is compared to TSC, and that the Unreal engine isn't the greatest to work with, I don't think it would work. That, and I don't really want TSW3 becoming the minefield of unofficial 3rd party addons that TSC had become. I disliked buying a route, but finding out I needed 6x the cost of the routes worth of additional content just to play it.
Excellent idea on paper and this will open to the developers doing some sort of a workshop Wednesday stream sort of like how Jamie does this on train simulator classic. Cons Unreal Engine takes a bit of time to learn and Simugraph might not handle a rack railroad physics.
My question on this would be that if DTG are controlling the store and are therefore publisher, what level of QA is being applied, given the sheer number of posts we get complaining about Rivet content NOT being marshaled by DTG. Any content put out through any channel maintained by DTG should be of the same standard according to the people who espouse the above, so how do you equate this with this new 3rd party content? Personally I agree with Bravo2six above in that content would likely be much less quality and end up similar to TSC where you have a very few decent content creators and a whole load of dross.
There should be QA on payware routes specifically, if a route is sold for money, you’d have to join the dovetail games partner programme, this prevents a lot of issues around it, and assets would only be limited to TSW 3 content, you’d not be allowed to use content outside of TSW 3.
Yes it would, and payware content would be on partner programmes only, which you would have to pass a rigorous application through to dovetail games, and freeware would be on the download station/ manager. This gives more power to the players and route builders
Yep, unreal engine takes a bit to learn, but it can be learned, imagine the pandora’s box you open up with a dedicated route builder for train sim world, a route and timetable builder
The OP said that people would be able to choose to mark their content as paid for And even if not, this is a distribution route, so DTG would be publishers outside of their own mechanism so the point stands. No need to imagine, just look at TSC with orphaned scenarios, DLC removed from sale, licenses revoked and needing to get DLC from over a dozen websites, all at cost to get a scenario to work, along with major DLC suppliers making it a requirement that you have all their other DLC to get things to work as intended.
the point stands for payware, but for freeware it doesn’t as it’s being posted onto a download station where it can be downloaded. To play devils advocate i do agree with the requirement argument, it’s true, even with freeware some players would need certain DLC(s) to be able to play this route, and thats a very fair argument, a solution to this might be a European Loco/Asset/Scenery Pack
what about when creating fictional routes because I have 1 in mind I doubt people would join the 3rd party team for a fictional route, I would love to make the Calder Valley line but that's on a scale to large for me and I don't want to get it wrong whereas fictional routes allow for poetic license
