It's nobody else's fault you've bought more PS and Steam games than you have time to play. How could you possibly know how long I've got? Yes I'm in my fifties, but I've had friends die who weren't out of their teens. But it was a good guess, I have a neurological disorder that takes 10 years off my life expectancy. Hence my impatience for the main line routes I want.
And then you go to the Trent Valley discussion thread and there's an excerpt from the developers' Discord that you can't have too many flights, because consoles can't provide enough performance. But you can't make an extended timetable on a PC, because it's now taboo after the Frankfurt S-Bahn.
As a dev for one of the teams who created one of the longer routes in TSW I thought I'd weigh in with a few bits. Multiple factors go into how long a route takes to build from built up areas, amount of custom assets needed, track complexity, stock complexity and timetable complexity. The longer a route gets the more of these factors will come into play and add on quite significantly to development time unless you start really cutting corners with custom assets, scenery and the timetable.
That’s where the SimRail approach comes in, gradually adding modules to eventually create an extensive route or network.
Are people in general willing to pay 80 Euro for a more then double length route? Or is it more likely they purchase 2 routes in a couple of months time? How many people really like trips of multiple hours? For me personally, a hour drive is already more then long enough and I noticed, many of the shorter routes are my favorite for a nice drive. It's also depending on the trains on the route, driving a ICE or a IC on a hour drive is just boring for me, however a hour drive on S-bahn Frankfurt is fun. On Linke Rheinstrecke, I prefer to drive the BR628 or BR110, I like the BR103, but it just a boring A to B drive with not much interesting to do. Another potential issue with longer routes, because there are more trains and more scenery and you spend more time in one session, it will not be good for blurry textures and possible the performance in general. I'm happy with routes where you can drive services from around 30 - 60 minutes. Variation in services/trains can be is also important, but I still have a lot of fun on S-bahn Frankfurt, even with mostly only driving the BR430. But the fact you have multiple S-bahn lines with multiple routes makes it more fun. Also branch lines can give some extra gameplay, without the need to drive for hours. I'm still hoping for a second S-bahn route, I think S-bahn Hamburg is my favorite to see in the game.
To me, it depends a lot on the route in question and my personal mindset at the time. Driving an ICE from Kassel to Würzburg or a freight consist from Hamburg to Lübeck can be deadly boring, but sometimes I enjoy it in an almost meditative way. Driving some fast train from Fulda to Frankfurt or Koblenz to Mainz still takes an hour with only one stop in between, but is usually more fun and doesn't "feel" as long. S-Bahn is the other end of the spectrum. Sometimes it just feels tedious and repetitive, and sometimes it's a lot of fun. The route and timetable has a lot of influence for me here. For example, S-Bahn Vorarlberg usually goes right in the tedious and repetitive category for me, despite the nice scenery. Meanwhile S-Bahn Frankfurt definitely is in the fun category. It feels much more alive and connected, and has so many options to choose from! I'd love to see more route networks like that too Or instead of longer routes or network-ish routes, have one medium-length stem route with a bunch of branches along. Some of those could be non-elctrified, some freight-only, this would add a great deal of variety. I know I've beaten this poor horse to death already, but I still consider Rosenheim-Salzburg a huge missed opportunity in this regard. This one could have included half a dozen shorter and very diverse branch lines, making the route overall feel more special and add value
You're right about it depends on the route, Kassel - Wurzburg is a perfect example of a boring route with not much to, while Linke Rheinstrecke is a beautiful and interesting route to drive. I have the same with S-bahn Voralberg, no idea why but it's just not that much fun and the scenery is also not that breathtaking, at least not close to the track. Network routes like S-bahn Frankfurt are very nice, but i'm not interested in the high speed part of this route. Instead I wish they had extended the part where the 423 drives (S2?) so we where be able to drive this train a little longer. I agree branch lines on Salzburg - Rosenheim would be nice, being able to drive the BR628 for some longer for example. On itself the route is not bad and has good scenery but driving a half hour with the BR111 is fine too. Only question is, where do you cut the line instead of Rosenheim? In conclusion for me, we have to much A to B routes, also to much mainlines and we need more networks like S-bahn Frankfurt and branch lines.
I would not pay €80 for any route in one hit. Which is why the best idea is to release in sections which can be budgeted for over a period of time, assuming 6 to 8 months between parts.
For me, i would pay more for a route, if it was well-developed, i don't mind paying £60 -70 for a module (aircraft) in DCS because the amount of work and love that have gone into it are clearly evident, i will always reward that kind of effort, but on the flip side i have purposely waited for certain DTG routes or packs to be on sale because rehashing the same thing over and over again with a different skin, while at the same time disregarding the blatant bugs that have existed since it was 1st released, should not be rewarded, i justify this action to myself as still providing support, so content will still be made i just refuse to pay the full amount, unless its from a 3rd party that has proved itself to provide a good level of quality.
I think I've seen them post screenshots of an early 642 and a Diesel-Traxx some days ago for a route connecting Poland to Dresden. But not the route itself yet. But I agree about Berlin. XD
Whilst I get where you're coming from the issue you run into is that players require the previous routes to be able to do that.
You can get 2-3 hours on some of the existing routes. Are you playing those? Cajon Pass, etc. My summary below, some people don't like explanations so, the TLR summary: -TSW is not Simrail. -Simrail routes don't have AI timetables, it is multiplayer only. -Locos are sold separately. -That's why Simrail is cheaper and can do longer routes. There's just much less content there. -TSW can't exist without AI timetables, as that's integral to the game and there's no plans to make it multiplayer. -Comparing the two is silly as they are completely different systems that just both happen to feature trains. -Since TSW can't "do" Simrail without following Simrail procedures...would you buy a route with no AI traffic and only two locos for $150-$200? "like Simrail?" Explanation: Arguably, the way to get "longer" routes in time without going longer on distance is to do frequent stopping, slower runs. The problem is that most of the people demanding "longer" routes in time are also demanding they be high speed too. Commuter routes also run quite long, and you are stopping at stations anyway so switching maps or turning around to go back down the line are actually realistic since you are already stopping. If you want both long time AND high speed....well then you have a very specific, narrow situation that is quite rare and also technically an issue. Wanting a non-stop at 100+ mph going 3 hours means you need a solid 300 mile route, the technical hurdle of not making it run like garbage over that huge distance, and then the cost of building 300 miles of track. That's assuming that you get the "normal" number of people buying such a route and not a very small number of people willing to spend $240 on a DLC, plus that it doesn't run like garbage because it's so long. To be fair, it could be maybe $150-160 in theory if you don't expect more rolling stock than normal and are good with just the standard 1-2 locomotives. I have a suggestion... do a poll of people who would pay $150-200 for a 3 hour high speed route and gauge how many people are actually interested in this. To be fair, it might be a bit less if you don't include more rolling stock and just the one or two existing locomotives. Since it's "6 times as long" I was figuring a lot more stock in to be used along that route. As for if that's FEASIBLE.... I don't know. We do know the more layers and AI traffic you have, the worse a route runs in TSW. I think there's something to the length from "endpoint" because it's been mentioned by DTG staff before that the game loads in and tracks all the AI content on the route and the longer it is, the more you have. As far as I know, Simrail has no AI traffic, it's either just you alone... or you go multiplayer. That unloads much of the game "load" from the game to the players or omits it. The system doesn't have to "drive" all those other trains all down the line, and I think each "section" of SimRail is separate, although connected (so it's still only "tracking" a short space, then starts over? SimRail also isn't sold as one piece. It's a bunch of routes which while much cheaper, don't have that AI component and nor include locomotives. So, you're "saving" about 2/3 of the cost of a TSW DLC. Each smaller segment (we can argue about asset quality) is cheaper, but closer to a TSW sized piece. The prices for locos are... comparable depending on the exchange rates. $13-16 I think so comparable. That lack of AI is key in the comparison of the two. A huge, active AI timetable is KEY to the TSW experience and Simrail not having that makes cheaper prices and longer/connected routes possible. TSW has no plans to go multiplayer, so the only way to be like Simrail would be to remove that AI traffic. Finally, Simrail is one piece, made by the same studio, for the same small part of Poland. It's very niche. It is not the "world tour" that TSW is of both different countries and eras. So we have different routes made by different studios in different times of different areas of the world. They often don't "fit" together. It's just the nature of the beast. To make a "Simrail like" 300 mile route work, it would have to be LIKE SImrail. It would have to be one studio, doing one area, all at once, with no AI traffic, with only 1-2 locos. That would in theory work in the TSW framework...but who would play it? There'd be zero traffic without multiplayer. TSW without AI traffic wouldn't be TSW. I suppose you could skimp and do 1/6th of a timetable but people would complain it was "too empty." Again... define what is actually feasible, propose it and poll it to see if anyone would play it. I don't think people will play TSW without lots of AI traffic, especially for $150-200.
I'm glad it's not just me The whole route feels rather bland and uninteresting, more than it should. In real life, it's quite a nice and scenic ride The lack of variety in rolling stock might be to blame too, partly at least. In my opinion, the mix of different types of service and all the different paths these services take is what makes the atmosphere of this route There's something here for everyone... Wanna do freight services? Check. Faster regional? Check. Slower regional? Check. S-Bahn? Check. ICE services? Check. Really looking forward to use the 420 on this route someday... It will add another layer onto this already delicious cake for sure I'd keep Rosenheim as endpoint. The only really feasible alternative would be extending it to München, and this would blow up the core services (the 111/Dosto ones between München/Rosenheim and Salzburg) up to about 2,5 hours duration. Not to mention the added complexity of the München area. Just inlcuding the three short branch lines of Prien-Aschau and Traunstein-Waging and Traunstein-Ruhpolding would add a lot of "bonus" services without too much extra effort! The services for the Waging branch are already included in the timetable anyway, but ending (or starting) at Hufschlag after a meager 3 minutes of travel...
Maybe the buildings (lot of them are the same as on German routes) are also causing that bland feel on S-bahn Voralberg. I tried this route many time and every time I played it 2 times or so and give up. I'm playing on console, so Frankfurt S-bahn for me is S-bahn only anyway (except the ICE-T and very short drive BR143), but I still like it. It's the route concept, the scenery, the train itself and the frequent stopping pattern what's making this route interesting for me. The BR420 will indeed make it even more interesting.
You're spot on. Instead of making the route "long," it's better to make it "wider." Variety will come naturally.
I'm happy with the length of routes at the moment. Last year's GWR Riviera Line release shows what can be done when you're building a route through rural areas. We got a TSW release that was larger than than the TSC release. In a similar vein, WCML over Shap was (I think) the longest UK route when it was released and was the same as the TSC version. Again, mostly rural. Trent Valley is possible because Milton Keynes and Stafford to Crewe can be used. TV is longer than the TSC version. I was concerned in the early days of TSW but as explained by those in the know above, route length is decided by what sort of route you're looking for. As an example, if we get ECML south at some point, (maybe up to Stevenage but we get the Moorgate branch as a bonus) we may see a shorter version of it compared to TSC given how built-up the London part is, but there may be an independent developer building Stevenage to Cambridge and Peterborough as an extension because both routes are mostly rural. If that's how we get longer routes, I'm fine with it. Having seen what's happened with the WCML I think that may give us an indication of how other mainline routes will develop in the coming years.
So... many interesting things have been said. Simrail was mentioned, and true, as we say in France, comparaison n'est pas raison (looking at you operator#7940 ). They're developing in western Poland... and railfans in the east have nothing to get excited about (that's Wivenswold who is fed up with WCML ). TSW's approach seems to satisfy everyone, a bit here and a bit there... and 10 years later (as was the case for TS20xx), we end up with an extensive network. (As I'm getting older too, the sooner the better.) You want to have some short sessions ? No problem, we'll continue like this and everything will be fine. But... you want to drive something a bit longer, say a longer distance at higher speed for a slightly longer period ? Then just put a simple marker on down main (platform 4 iirc) at Milton Keynes (for example), you drive over it and bam, the game automatically loads Trent Valley and you can continue ! What's so complicated about that ? (The timetables don't always match, so well it'll just be free roam. The next platform is busy ? You appear 5 minutes later and that's it. Those are just details !)
As I’ve always said, I’m more interested in doing full services, or at least what a driver would be doing. Something like Suffragette line; yes it’s only 15 miles or so but it’s a complete network which I really like. Then look at ECML; that’s very long but it’s still nowhere to nowhere so it doesn’t interest me.
yes even if its only one terminus it's OK, you can pretend you are running a half service but who is running it between Doncaster and Peterborough (or as you rightly said: Nowhere and Nowhere) only.
I personally found the route lengths adopted by the developers for the TSC to be comfortable, and the chosen endpoints are logical and justified. The gameplay feels complete. For me, comfortable lengths are: - for high-speed highways – 150 km or more; - for mixed interregional traffic and US freight routes – 75 to 120 km; - for suburban traffic with dense urban development and routes with industrial infrastructure and freight yards – 50 to 75 km. - shorter, exclusive routes within the original lengths. At the same time, I'm a big fan of solutions combining routes into larger highways and recreating major network routes (ECML Merge; NEC, NJ Transit, GWR, Midland ML, Southeastern network). Such combined routes offer us slightly different opportunities and experience.
I have to admit I like those end to end routes too, Glossop line and Birmingham cross city and Suffragette line is high on my list to buy. Those route are a little quiet do to missing stock, but I still enjoy them and at least it proves smaller routes can be fun. End to end is not mandatory for me, when there is enough stuff to do i'm also happy with non end to end. Also it is just not always possible because it will become to huge. Frankfurt S-bahn is also not complete, but still fun to drive, however the complete S-bahn network would be awesome.
Yep, me too. That's why I like that recent routes/timetables tend to come with more preparation services, like bringing a train from a siding to the station, before starting the "real" service. This adds a lot of immersion for me That's also why I'd like to have a "cold start" option for these kinds of preparation services, with the appropriate time buffer to prepare the train properly of course. Any complete S-Bahn network would be amazing! Frankfurt, Stuttgart, München, you name it Although the technical hurdles (performance, complexity) will be way too high in any case. That's probably also the reason why for example Frankfurt-Fulda didn't include the S-Bahn tunnel and the northern branch from Hanau through the freight yard, despite the tracks being all laid and used by AI trains.
I'm afraid you're right about the technical hurdles, however I can accept less AI trains or other services when the S-bahn network is done well. I still enjoy Frankfurt S-bahn on console, but also Birmingham Cross City with the original timetable
OK I'm different, I would rather compromise on route length instead of AI trains... I need to have my surroundings feel busy and alive when driving Road traffic and a good amount of AI trains add a big deal of immersion! Pedestrians are a huge thing too, lately we've been having way too many ghost stations (Frankfurt isn't all that busy, Leipzig also comes to mind) but I get why that is.
It depends on the route and trains for me, the named routes are fun for me, as I like the trains and routes itself and because of that I'm willing to sacrifice other things. S-bahn Voralberg is the opposite for me, it's quite boring and also has not much traffic. Long routes don't mean more fun in general, however the network on Frankfurt S-bahn does. Of course I like a good busy route with a lot of different trains, but I also understand this is not always possible, especially not on console.
It seems to me that what would have been very good routes like MML, WCMLS and GWE (all great for stopping services) have been hobbled by their lack of length when it comes to the fast services that run on them, in many instances for example there is not even an intermediate stop which ruins immersion just driving from A to B. Perhaps DTG/Rivet should approach such routes from the angle of the express trains on their route and not from the direction of the stoppers, thus ensuring that the fast trains have 1 or 2 stops prior to reaching track end, this would make them much more attractive to drive and sell more routes. They can do it, I mean look how long Antelope Valley is and there’s not even a fast train on that!
Building a long route in sections over time is fine except that it isn't working out very well for the WCML, for instance. We're going to end up with a hodgepodge of segments, built by different developers using different eras, unmatchable rolling stock and looking very different scenery wise. Even if you could merge all the sections into one long route, it wouldn't make it drivable from end to end, unless you believe in time travel.
Sorry if I'm reading you wrong, but did you say Antelope Valley is longer than Shap? It's not. It's quite a bit shorter. More interesting to me personally yes, but it's not "longer." I think Antelope is around 75ish miles? Shap is around 90ish?
But Shap wasn’t made by DTG/Rivet and Antelope was, so they can do it. I was criticising the in-house routes that aren’t long enough for fast services largely have no intermediate stops (a tiny number at Watford Jn) where they end up just racing fast trains from A to B.
The thing is, when you extend those routes, it will not become less boring, it only will be boring for a longer period of time. Kassel - Wurzburg is longer but still boring, as you only drive at speed from city to city. Driving on GWE with with the class 125 is not really exciting, if you extend the route to Oxford for example, would it be less boring? In my opinion, high speed services are not exciting, as you only drive at speed and that's it. I have more fun with the ICE on Frankfurt S-bahn then on Kassel - Wurzburg, because you have a few stops, speed restrictions, change of track, and red signs, you even can't go faster then 160 km/h on Frankfurt S-bahn route.
SEHS was made by DTG. It's about as long as Shap and high speed. Kassel was made by DTG. It's significantly longer and high speed. You cited Antelope with is significantly shorter. Just not sure why you didn't choose the better examples.
I don’t think any routes are boring, that is an entirely subjective matter for the individual and at the end of the day you don’t have to buy long routes. Perhaps if you think longer train sim routes are boring then this is not the hobby for you? Also you don’t have to drive the entire route from end to end every time, but it is there for those who do, the simmers who are looking for more immersion. But it can’t be done the other way around with a shorter route can it? I’d be very surprised if most players didn’t want longer routes than many were forced to have. I mean do you think it’s ok to be forced to end both the HST drives after 30 minutes largely without stopping. I don’t.
Again you’re entirely missing the point which if you’d of read my post, and the examples I gave, you might have understood better. It’s not about the length of the route solely, it’s about giving fast trains or express services some intermediate stops along those routes. I even mentioned MML, GWE and WCMLS! Try again.
By the way for those seemingly getting confused WCMLS is west coast mainline South not Shap. That route came with an entirely different name.
I didn't say longer routes are boring, I said in my opinion high speed services are not exciting and so for me they're boring. DTG tried with Kassel - Wurzburg a longer high speed route, based on the opinions I read on here, it's not the most popular route. So for me, extending something what is already boring, make it only more boring. I don't have anything against longer routes, but does it really solves something for the majority of players? With stopping services there is just more to do then driving at speed, that's just a fact. And why you said "this is not the hobby for you" is everyone's guess. I enjoy many routes for what you can do on it and yes even the short routes, so it's a perfect hobby for me.
btw, if i'm not mistaken, Kassel-Würzburg still holds the record as the longest TSW route, no? and if i'm not mistaken, WCMLOS comes in 2nd
for me, it's not about length moreso realistic services. ECML is particularly bad for this with 0 Realistically terminating services (aside from peak Doncaster services). even with 1 terminus I can imagine I'm simply doing half a service. Kassel Würzburg is also bad for this, and this adding to the long boring landscape creates quite an unpleasant route. CCN, B2C, MML and Pfälzische Ludwigsbahn are other examples of this.
This seems to have derailed from the original "longer routes" being 3+ hours to a discussion of stopping patterns on existing length routes (under 100 miles) which is a different discussion. DTG has said their data shows people prefer under 1 hour runs (about 45 mins I think was said was ideal for a full run) with a few of 1.5 hours for "long" options, and we can do that even on a 90 mile route. Not EVERY route is of course that long, and it's comical to have the 390 on such a short route as WCMLS but that's far from addressing the ORIGINAL point which was "needing" routes that were several hundred miles. As I said (and was ignored) there are already high speed runs on SEHS and Kassel that are considered "full" runs by DTG standards (ie 45-60 minutes for even an express) The OP was about explicitly SUPER long rounds that took 3 hours or more with a high speed train. As I said, if we want to discuss stopping patterns that are more authentic vs more "interesting" ones and who "likes" different stopping patterns, that's a different discussion than if we need "super long" routes.
