Discussion in 'Suggestions' started by Anonymous, Oct 18, 2021.
Maybe make TSW2 multiplayer. With the selection of single player and online.
I’m not really sure how multiplayer would be implemented, you couldn’t really drive with friends as you would both be struggling pathing wise, co-operative in cab would be boring for the one person not driving and if it was a big multiplayer server you would just get people “having a laugh” by driving well over the speed limit or backing everything up ruining it. I think it’s the one type of game that multiplayer would be very difficult to implement
Agree completely. It's hard enough getting people to cooperate properly in something like Mud Runner or Farm Sim where there are simple goals to work towards, so with everyone driving their own trains with one person able to bring down the whole network, this has the potential to be chaos.
As you say, lots of the suggestions I've seen seem to be based on one person driving and another doing some other task on the train which wouldn't hold my interest at all. I can see why people like the idea, just no idea how you'd implement it in a way that actually works.
If not for privatisation the UK trains would still have secondmen, and there'd be no problem over how to implement it!
Well I got an idea for multiplayer but it involves a lot of work. One player get's the controls of the crossings and signalling. And all the other players can sabotage the crossings and signalling. The reward if you succeed as saboteur is a fenomenaal derailing or train crash and lots of XP. You can also join the railway police to catch saboteurs guided by the player who controls the signals. You can also drive the trains but I wouldn't trust the signalling.
I see kids going bananas over this. Add some lootboxes and kaching
They promised it with TSW it never appeared, they promised it with TSW 2, it's yet to appear. Personally we've been feeding ideas about multiplayer to them for years, and how the ideas could be implemented.
Matt P always says that it's something they want to add, but haven't got round to doing, so maybe with the upcoming break in DLC, they could explore the principals of multiplayer along with bug fixing and see where it takes them.
Not just a case of "make the guards and the other player can do that", but what would that guard be doing, how would it work in game, how can you make it interesting, absorbing and part of the world?
And how do they actually interact with the driver.
From what I know, for the most part the guard and driver only really interact when the guard clears the train for departure
For the purposes of the game, you could employ the "guard" role for many of the real life aspects of their role.
Bell codes for guards
Which are what, how would they work?
How do you program people who haven't paid an won't pay for a ticket for example
This isn’t the kind of game where those kind of things would be implemented. It’s a train simulator. Talk of train crashes isn’t welcome on this forum, and certainly not the thought of rewarding them with points. Not even as a joke suggestion, even though you are clearly not joking.
It’s also for the people who would try and disrupt a proper use of multiplayer in the way you describe that makes the whole thing harder to implement.
The same way Bus Simulator does..... It's an interaction, and automatic fine, that would award a revenue to the TOC, which they are required to obtain a certain amount during their shift.
Did you open the bell code link I posted. It tells you what they are used for, so if you overshoot a station etc, the guard would go to the rear cab and in theory control the train with the drivers input etc.
I didn't but now I have
I would still not see how this could be implemented in game in it's current form... How would DTG write a timetable which would accommodate those things, given the current limitations of their signalling systems
Those things are already built in to the timetable, it's called station dwell time for door opening operations, which would reward for time keeping.
For station over runs, these are not timetabled, and everything would just start to run late, which is what already happens if you miss a AWS or DSD and come grinding to a halt.
The point is if you are in a multiplayer system then these things would have to happen else player 2 has little to do.
Not saying I don't overrun or miss the occasional alarm (I do, but normally because I'm browsing YouTube at the time), but this would be a different thing
No they don't. You're overcomplicating the principal of multiplayer.
When not doing ticket checks, you're doing door operations at stations. When you stop at stations, new passengers get on etc, and you'll be doing ticket checks again.
If you've completed all your tasks, you get to sit and read the paper (browse Youtube or the web) until the next station, just like real life guards do.
You could script random medical emergencies, missing children etc.
Or if you're really bored, perform a trolley service for refreshments.
I don't think I am. I play games to play them. I want to be active and involved in what I'm doing, not sitting reading the paper
I think it's because being a guard in real life would not be my optimal role that i wouldn't consider it exciting and involving on a game
I don't remember "Bus conductor sim" being a standalone thing (maybe I haven't looked hard enough)
Ok but I said secondman, not guard.
I would suggest you go and read up about the role of a guard before saying it wouldn't be active or involving. In theory a guard has more to do than a driver on a train in the UK at least.
Bus Simulator, the driver checks the tickets, and is an "mini game" within the main game of driving the bus to add a little something extra to do instead of driving the bus.
All a second man really does on a diesel locomotive is call out signals for the driver, make tea and check on the heating system for vacuum piped vehicles. Even less to do than a guard.
Oh, I am sure they have a lot to do on a busy train with lots of stops and people needing help and assistance, but there are also lots of "dead times" where the guard walks the train between stops and then does... a few other bits I'm sure
But even you said
Ah OK, then your previous statement regarding privatisation would be incorrect. Updates in technology would have more of an impact on having a second person rather than whether the company operating the train had shareholders or not, surely?
I don't get your point or see what your issue with another role within the "railway simulator" is? You asked how it could be implemented within the game world, which I've done, but because it doesn't suit your play style, you're being all negative.
I asked how it could be implemented. I am yet to be convinced that walking the train and checking tickets, opening the doors every few minutes and maybe waiting for the never ending stream of passengers to clear would be "an absorbing experience" that people come back to time and again (ie making it worth the dev time)
Now a cross over from a dispatcher or signaller I can see, but guard I never have been able to
To me "multiplayer" in this instance wouldn't be very interactive or even that cooperative, and yes "to me"
And some hands-on driving experience if you’re on good terms with the driver
Yeh, I wasn't being entirely earnest that I'd love to see that mode but until 1993 (so in the run up to privatisation), for instance, HST would have two drivers in the cab who'd swap halfway, the other taking the role of second.
I'm absolutely with you. They'd spend time and resources developing that, then everyone would want to be the driver and after maybe an initial novelty period, nobody would ever be using it. I've never once wanted to play TSW without actually being in control of a train. Even the 'passenger' experience is just something to tick off for a trophy and I bet most people just set it off and then go and do something else for a while. Who's honestly going to want to wander up and down a train for hours on end, opening doors and checking tickets, without getting paid for it?!
Didn't even know there WAS a trophy for that...
I'm one of the vocal supporters of adding MP (which is already a formally declared and confirmed intent by DtG, so I'm not sure counting supporters should even matter) but working as conductor, etc while someone else is driving is the absolute last thing I think about when thinking about MP. There are people who would enjoy that (especially when playing with friends), and they should have that mode, but for others like myself even simply the idea of each player driving their own train on a route at the same time is a complete transformation of the gameplay experience. Knowing you have real, actual people around you - instead of the pre-scripted, predictable, uninteractable AI driving other trains - would make for a completely new game, increase replayability exponentially, and provide new grounds for bringing new players to the sim. There are a myriad of different MP ideas and modes out there, some mentioned in the thread I linked to in my first reply.
More than one (I don't have them)...
Maybe. Although it seems like a lot of effort for the sake of one of those trains that passes by maybe having a human controller. It's not like you're closely interacting with them the way you would in a racing game (or even Mud Runner, Farm Sim, any of those) – if everyone's keeping to the timetables the way they should, the ideal situation is that you'll never catch that train in front (maybe driven by Derek in Stevenage), and the train behind (perhaps driven by Hans in Nürburg) won't catch you. And if you do see them, then they're probably dicking about and you're not going to be able to complete your route as a result. The best you can hope for is sounding your horn at an approaching train and maybe having Tracy in Dagenham sound hers back at you. Would she have a little label above her train telling you it's her? Probably half the playerbase on here would say that was immersion breaking and want it turned off...
Even if you can have a private game where you have a group of friends all driving trains on the same route, you won't really see each other, so it'll be just like it is now, except you won't be able to pause to go for a pee without screwing up their games for them. I rarely complete a route without pausing at least once to get a drink, answer the door or because I've been distracted by something else, so would you be happy to sit at a red until I get back?
You clearly have no sense of humor if you can't even detect it. No talk about crashes? Do a search on crashes. It's filled with mentions of crashes. *
*Yes, that also is a joke
and this isn’t over complicating a Train driving sim?
The argument generally is that nowhere does the blurb about the game mention driving... you also have plenty of things you can do which do NOT involve driving (such as collecting ice creams, picking up logs or mending fences)
It was even shown to me earlier you can get awards for spending 100 miles seated as a passenger!
The best thread for multiplayer.
It's a simulation of life on the railway, hence why it's called Train Sim World and not Train Driving Sim World.
Very true but it surely it’s main focus is on driving trains,
You could argue that not many train simulators mention the word “driver” just like flight simulator never mentions ‘pilot’ or Call of duty never mentions soldier
The thing with multiplayer is that driving trains (which is the primary role of the game) is a very isolated job. You never interact with other train drivers you would only interact with people in the signalboxes (and that would be quite rare) there is no current architecture in the game that you can play co-op or as a team or even against others that make it any different from single player.
Separate names with a comma.