How Do Dtg Restore Trust With Community?

If they really said that VR was being planned, that definitely was a long time ago. In surveys DTG has done about features desired by the community, VR kept coming in dead last.

 

I personally believe that’s because the poll was hidden away on here which doesn’t give a true representation of what people wanted. Sure VR might not have been at the top but I think it would have had a higher ranking.

 

I used to want vr for this, with the issues elsewhere I’m kind of glad they didn’t. I think it’d be incredible but it’s not there yet

 

Yikes... some pretty bad takes here.

- Unreal engine is not the source of TSW's issues. For mostly every problem out there with TSW, you can probably find a solvable counterpart in the gaming industry. Even if TSC currently has alluring advantages over TSW... going back to that engine now is pretty laughable.

- UE5 is not a magic bullet, so drop the fantasy. The benefits of UE5 come out if a developer/artist CHOOSES to do so! Speed (avoiding creating highly detailed and more assets) and performance (going all in on new lighting tools, and lack of compatability of new tools with older consoles) are two reasons DTG could potentially not be swooning over UE5 immediately

- EA isn't the "devil" that has inspired DTG. It's DLC structure may have ideologies in gaming business (inspired by EA and titles like The Sims)... but that establishment was 10+ years ago.

I actually don't mind supporting DTG and giving them my trust... but time and time again whenever they go two steps forward, they take another two back. In the case of TSW 3, the poor upgrade structure, odd glossy materials, immediate sound issues, eye adaptation, fuzzy distant volumetric clouds, poor shadows, multiple locomotive instances, alleged performance issues... it really isn't a great first look. The cherry on the cake being the lack of enthusiasm to continue supporting older routes. So now I've gone from "yh I'll preorder TSW 3" to "I'm holding off a train-sim title for the first time!"

 

Well said

 

I don't agree personally. I guess to counter my own blasting of UE4 as a game engine choice, they should have spent a lot more time making tools that would work which would open up the game to the community along with 3rd party devs. Instead hopeful community members have to learn how to use the UE4 suite to even dream of designing routes and content, a much GREATER undertaking than simply using a streamlined editor we see in TSC. Even DTG said there's license issues if they make their UE4 toolset available. Its quite a mess, don't you think? I dont suggest we go back to the TSC engine either (to clarify) but it should have been a pathfinder to the next game DTG would release, surely? It had a lot of what everyone wanted but the game being limited by the age of the engine in terms of performance and other certain features.

 

Matt has said "Well ofc, there will be a multiplayer." in Train Simulator 10th anniversary video which was at some point deleted.
Honestly if they have troubles with creating multiplayer just say so, dont stay silent...

 

They said it several times in the last years. They said it again today.
How many more times do you want to hear it?

 

I hear some of the points of what you're saying.... but

- Unreal engine is arguably more powerful and just as easy to work with. Having been there myself, it's not as counter-intuitive as you may think (and one of the reasons I'm rather annoyed that DTG used as an excuse when initially prorogued the editor)

- In my personal belief... the licensing issue is debatable. It might be a licensing restriction on use of UE4 tools to create paid content. Or it could be TOC licensing. Both of which lose a lot of weight in an argument when compared to other titles. Licensing might not truthfully be the entire issue to the editor... but motivated by monetization strategies* or reverse-engineering.

What I do agree with you on... is that Dovetail planned out TSW POORLY. No debate at all. The lack of proper tools, custom liveries that don't require the in-game editor, lack of AI to make up gaps in timetables, duplicated content in DLCs, lack of route extensions... all of it and more. Difference being that DTG engineered it that way... not that Unreal is incapable of doing so.

*To further expand on this point (and take what I say with a grain of salt)... the licensing excuse DTG used is rather inconsistent. I believe there is a valid argument that DTG wanted third-parties to only exist through their revenue streams. This is backed up from comments from developers on stream and discord (who once mentioned that third-parties should pay royalties to DTG). A similar precedent was made with FSW, when developers told third-parties that content could only be sold via DTG (so that it could go on their store and via steam).

 

They've done so on stream loads of times. Was a running joke about Sam and Nat needing to "hold Matt or Adam back" on streams. That's how we ended up with the "if it's not on the roadmap" and "we've just said it, but it doesn't mean it's coming" remarks