When TSW 1 was announced, I thought I was dreaming. I was very impressed with the graphic quality and, mainly, with the level of immersion (being able to leave the cabin, explore the environment and interact in a more realistic way). However, when playing TSW, I was overcome with a deep sense of frustration. As you know, what makes people love the railway is the details, especially the sonorous ones. The creaking of metals, the echo of the horn, the sounds of wheels on the tracks, the alarm of the gate at the level crossing. Now, it just doesn't exist in the game, which is absurd, since we are talking about a simulator. The sounds are absolutely generic and without expression. There is also no realism in the brightness of the headlights. There are three levels of headlight intensity selection that just don't work. I can't believe that DoveTail is unable to implement these details and more, given that the game community makes mods to fill these gaps. I bought a railway simulator, I don't want to have to look for mods to add the effects and features that should already be in the game. That's it.
With the bugs that are still in game and lack of Routes that people would love to see and Loco's they would love to see all that could be cured and it wouldn't cost DTG a penny, just give the tools to the public and they will turn TSW2 from a goodish game into a great game within weeks. But of course they won't do that, they like to hide behind licensing when if you look at other games that have a higher profile and just survive on the mods that the public do like PES for instance I do not think they are being honest.
I get your point about the tools and editor and I certainly would like at least to make my own consists and scenarios for my personal use and enjoyment. But it's not so straightforward as you think. DTG have to deal with licensing from Epic as well as the IP holders and railroads. They have said on numerous occasions that they would like to offer the tools to players but their hands are tied. It doesn't matter what other train sims do, DTG has decided to follow the straight and narrow with licensing and we have to respect that.
It does not benefit them in the slightest to intentionally hinder user-created content. Their blind-eye approach to sharing liveries with the livery editor and various modding communities is proof of where they stand. DTG is not a fool and understands that user-created content is what keeps old simulation games flourishing for years. TS20xx is direct proof of that. And, less directly, they clearly initially had intentions of releasing a public editor, going so far as to have "Studio Updates" and progress reports through the first couple years of the game's life. Your presumptions about DTG's intentions hold little ground because there is no motive. Licensing is a very real issue; it is a common annoyance and red tape of a capitalist society. Some companies may have more success with striking licensing deals, figure out loopholes that allow them to categorise user-generated content as free and therefore not making money off of intellectual property without permission, or in the case of some studios (ahem Run8Studios) just not bothering with licensing at all and hoping they do not get sued. If DTG were against modding as Run 8's developers are, they would be making concerted efforts to crack down on user-generated content and preventing the modification of assets such as Run 8 did with its laughable file 'encryption' in Run8 v2. You may believe that DTG has some ulterior motive and sinister greedy plan for withholding the editor, but they know that tucking away the editor only hurts their userbase expansion and profits. If you have any evidence to support your conjecture that DTG are being dishonest, I would be quite keen to see it. I will admit, DTG holds a very conservative approach to licensing, not daring to take risks that some other studios do, but that does not mean that they are acting perfidiously. Cheers
So money is not a motive? Of course it is, without releasing tools to the public you have a captured market. The licensing argument you have just doesn't hold water especially when you look at games like PES. The game has a much larger audience than TSW2. The game is released fully unlicensed thanks to EA with their FIFA minus one or two clubs and the odd competition. And yet PES players have the tools they need to fully licence the game, kits ,players, competitions ETC. I would assume football is more heavily licenced than trains and have more companies/bodies overseeing any infringement and yet PES still release their game year after year, funny that eh? I would argue there is no risk to DTG whatsoever. They have said the actual routes themselves are not subject to licensing just the Trains and Stations. So why not have people doing their own trains and stations. You actually think that by releasing the tools to do modding will actually hold back the userbase, hahaha. Look at Fallout 4/ Skyrim or even Train Simulator. So why is it ok for people to mod TS and release mods and for DTG to feature those mods on a live stream through the steam workshop and other means but not for TSW2? DTG makes a tidy profit from DLC and I am not begrudging them that, all I am saying is be honest about it rather than hiding behind the licencing argument.
Of course it is a motive. If you had read my explanation, you would understand why it is beneficial for DTG to release an editor to expand the userbase and profits. No, that is not how it works. Anyone who purchases content from DTG would have bought content from DTG, regardless if there was an editor to make something themselves or not. You misunderstand the motivations of content creators. If a game does not support user-generated content, those who prefer to create that content will look elsewhere--particularly Open Rails or Trainz. DTG can not force or capture those uses into the TSW userbase. Are you sure about that? No, that is not licensing. You misunderstand what licensing is. Licensing is not the usage of copyrighted content within a game. Licensing is being given permission to use intellectual property, by the owner of said property, for monetary gain. User-generated content does not need to be licensed because users do not recreate trademarks for the purpose of monetary gain. There is a risk, but it is low. I would argue that DTG is being too cautious about the implications of providing users the tools to share potentially copyrighted content, but that is their decision to make as part of their risk-management strategy, not ours. My god, it is like you did not even read my argument. My argument was strictly that releasing the tools to do modding would EXPAND the userbase, hence it is tinfoil-hattery to suggest that DTG would not want to pursue that given the success of its own previous train simulator. DTG's statement, well at least the statement provided by Sam on behalf of the company by nature of his public-speaking role, is that TS1 is an opened can of worms that would be literally impossible to control. Whatever fears they have of being sued for "enabling copyright infringement", they believe that they would not be held liable for TS1 anymore. For whatever reason, they believe that enabling users to share user-recreated intellectual property in TSW2 would be an infringement of property rights and do not want to take that risk. Again, I believe such charges would be low-risk, but that is the company prerogative. You still have not presented any evidence that DTG is lying, nor have you been able to successfully establish a motive. The only evidence I know of is the statements given by DTG staff. If you have any evidence that these claims are false, such as intellectual property law that contradicts DTG's claims, I would be keen to see it. Cheers
What? Of course they are lying,. DTG are not going to admit it because they want to keep all the money themselves as it would look bad but at least they would be honest and I would respect that. Are you honestly saying that the kits, competitions, Team names, Trophies, Stadiums ETC are not copyrighted material? EA lost the licence in there current game to feature AS Roma and Juventus and so had to rename both teams to comply with the copyright, thankfully modders have now remedied the situation. What DTG go through with licencing is nothing compared to what Konami and EA go through every year but modders always find a way to fill the gap, strange that eh? hahaha, you really believe that DTG statement regarding TS1? So it is fine releasing a copyrighted train and route in TS1 but not in TSW2 when the company is responsible for both games and the userbase is larger. You say that they do not want to take that risk with TSW2 and yet they still release stuff for TS1 and even played fan created content on youtube? (Workshop wednesday's) Does that sound like a company that is frightened of copyright to you? As for presenting evidence I have giving examples of much bigger examples of companies that do it just fin and that DTG want to protect profits and tbf what you have said only reinforces that. Also this is a forum, forums are for expressing opinions which I have as well as you have asking for 'evidence' in the way you have seems childish to me even though I did give examples. As I said before we will have to agree to disagree.
Please, a source. Any source. I gave you an example: if you can provide evidence of codified law that contradicts DTG's claims about licensing hurdles, I would be willing to read and listen. But so far you have not provided any such examples. See more about PES below. No, I did not say that. Please show me where I made any such claims. You seem to misunderstand the difference between licensed content, copyrighted content, and intellectual property in general, and where the terms overlap. Licensed content is intellectual property (copyrighted content, trademarked content, et al.) that has been given with express permission by the owner to be used by another entity for monetary gain. DTG obtains a licence for each railroad operator that they publish on Steam because they would be violating intellectual property laws if they sold someone else's property for profit without their permission. That makes that trademarked content licenced. DTG releases licenced content on their store for both TS1 and TSW2. The only instances where DTG releases unlicensed content is when it is fictional or unbranded, like the Metrolink content. When users create their own repaints and release them for free to the public domain, they are not releasing licensed content. The content contains intellectual property like logos and slogans, yes, but that property need not be licensed because it is not being sold for profit, therefore the owner of the property could not make claims that individual modders are liable for generating profits from property that is not theirs. Do you understand this? Of course they release "stuff" for TS1, but they only sell licensed content. Fan-created content on the Steam Workshop can not violate intellectual property laws because users are uploading content only using existing content from the game. No third-party content like user-created route assets (McDonald's buildings or the like) nor repaints can be uploaded to the Workshop. Workshop Wednesday is entirely within the bounds of DTG's claims. What DTG fears is not users being sued for violating copyright law, but DTG being held liable for using their content creation tools as a selling point to share copyrighted content—in effect, making profit off of a library of user-generated content that may contain unlicensed intellectual property. It is far-fetched but it is possible. Thank you for reminding me that this is a forum where different users can express differing opinions and discuss various subjects, and I agree. I have read your position and have given you my own thoughts on the matter which is an exertion of my abilities as a member of these forums. Please remember that the ability to express an opinion or thought does not exempt you from being disagreed with. That is the nature of an open forum where all can express their opinions, as you have stated yourself. I am perfectly willing to change my opinion on the matter but you have yet to provide me any source that what DTG is saying is false. Your example of PES does not hold water because: Konami does licence the leagues featured in their game. Any league that is not licensed has been replaced by a fictional interpretation. Konami does not hold the same fears that DTG has about being held liable for user-generated content. This does not make DTG liars, but it does make them more conservative. You conflate copyrighted content to licensed content, when these are, in fact, different things. User-generated content that is released for free to the community is NOT licensed unless otherwise specified. But it can still be trademarked if it depicts a likeness to a league's intellectual property. In fact, you said so yourself: It is not a profit motive because it would be to the benefit of DTG to release public creation and sharing tools (see my previous posts). Some sort of regulation must be in the way between DTG and its profit motive. If you prefer to speculate on your gut feelings and faulty understanding of the ownership and licensing of content, or by being facetious and condescending in your writing, then perhaps it would be in my best interest to forgo this discussion. I have little interest in debating dogma or baseless claims. Cheers
WOW! I bet you're fun at parties. You cannot alter my view on this. Of course I am open to a valid argument but not just hot air. Regarding Licences in PES and FIFA, are you suggesting they do not have to pay to feature Kits, Teams, Leagues, Competitions ETC. Of course they do. They have to pay UEFA for the CL and FIFA for the WC and all the leagues and then have deals with individual clubs, it is a minefield compared to the odd train licence. Please tell me you didn't think they got it for free, hahahahah. Your whole stance with the PES is Licences is confusing. There is copyrighted material and licences in PES/FIFA which is paid to individual teams and bodies and my whole argument is modders duplicate this and in PES' case actually puts the Licenced stuff back in the game and this in no way harms Konami or anyone else in fact it increases PES sales by a huge margin. So if bigger companies like Konami and FIFA do it year after DTG can as well. You claim to know what an open forum is while at the same time demand evidence even though that has been supplied imo. A forum is an exchange of opinions that may or may not include backed up evidence, in your case I find it doesn't. Whether or not you agree with me means very little to me, I am just expressing an opinion.
