Should Rivet Stick To ‘assisting’ With Route Building?

Discussion in 'PC Discussion' started by londonmidland, Nov 8, 2021.

?
  1. Yes

    55.7%
  2. No

    29.7%
  3. Don’t know/other

    15.1%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. londonmidland

    londonmidland Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2017
    Messages:
    2,846
    Likes Received:
    14,502
    As the title says, I feel like Rivet should stick to assisting DTG to create routes, as they did an exceptional job with the Glasgow Cathcart Circle route. Its scenery and custom made assets, which were made to a very high standard as well as being near picture perfect, were brilliant. The only thing I can criticise with the route is the station and ambient lighting. I don’t think we’ve seen a route of this quality and detail since its release.

    Anyway, back to the original topic - It seems like Rivet still haven’t got the hang of Simugraph, or know how physics of trains work. Their most recent train DLC, the Class 150, has multiple issues with its physics and sounds. This is just one example of where physics are wonky with the trains they make, unfortunately.

    Secondly, whilst they make some fantastic custom made assets, it seems like the struggle with route building on a bigger scale. Often areas are very bland, or obstructed by multiple trees, which aren’t even there in real life, to mask the fact that there’s very little scenery away from the immediate view from the track.

    What I do like about Rivet is that they make some very high quality modelled trains. This is another thing they specialise at.

    So, my suggestion is, why not kill two birds with one stone? We’ve seen their collaboration with DTG creates some very high quality routes (I believe Cathcart is the only route they’ve worked on together?) and I’d love to see this level of detail once again. Rivet also make some very high quality detailed trains, as mentioned above.

    I’d like to know what your thoughts of this are below. Thanks.
     
    • Like Like x 17
  2. Thelonius16

    Thelonius16 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2017
    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    400
    I said “don’t know” because it’s really none of my business who puts what product out to the market. If it’s good, people will buy it and they will make more. If it’s bad, people won’t buy it and they will stop making them. The issue self-regulates. I’m not going to tell someone what products they should make — except via my purchase decision.
     
    • Like Like x 20
  3. meridian#2659

    meridian#2659 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2021
    Messages:
    1,287
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    In this case i have 2 opinions:

    1: If they are up to learn from past mistakes, intend to improve them selves from dlc to dlc, then for me its fine rivet is continuing as 3rd party dev.

    This includes:

    - if not capable to do something like a proper transmission on simmugraph, then involve somebody or make sure staff get to a point where to know how its done.

    - if 95% of the forum community, 80% of the steam feedback says the sounds of the tubestock is terrible, probably there is something true about it. (In this example its not immersing me to sit in a train at all)

    - which brings me to the 3. Point: if my released product is not up to expected standard or has major quality mistakes, i do everything i can to fix that!
    We heared a tonn of excuses why rivet is not fixing their content starting from "we are a small team" to "we would have to rebuild the entire loco"

    Really? Spend one hour of your dev time to check if what you are doing is the right thing in first place.
    Its like somebody orders a mercedes, spent the amount of money of a mercedes, expect a mercedes and the customer has to realize he got a fiat...

    Rivet can make visually stunning content, thats out of question. Thats why i dont get their point. Most of the "big ones" mistakes could have solved with small effort at the right time in the development process.

    So here my second opinion:

    If they continue blow loco by loco, i rather wait until dtg is creatin the specific content.
    In other words: now tsw has a 150, will we ever get one with accurate behaviour? Thats probably the true point many players are upset, me included.

    Anyway, my conclusion is with all released dlc of the roadmap from rivet now, they should take their time now to fix arosa, the sound issue with the 38 tube stock and get their staff ready, that wrong physics cant happen again.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2021
    • Like Like x 6
  4. KaZu

    KaZu New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2021
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    14
    I answered no because I like how Rivet tries to bring diversity to TSW. I know all the issues with their routes (I still haven't bought any of them, I'm waiting the Arosa timetable update to do so), but they are improving at each iteration in my opinion. While WCL scenery is far from perfect, it's still way better than Arosa and IOW.
    So I'll just give them the benefit of the doubt for more iterations!
     
    • Like Like x 7
  5. Callum B.

    Callum B. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,446
    Likes Received:
    2,514
    I agree. Any other vote is presumptuous and, in my opinion, a little self-centred.

    Cheers
     
    • Like Like x 5
  6. chacal#2181

    chacal#2181 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2021
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    316
    Like said before, i dont thing that our opinion is of any help.
    Still if they collaborated on GCL I have to admit that i'm far more impressed by their collaboration that by their own results.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2021
  7. Krazy

    Krazy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2020
    Messages:
    373
    Likes Received:
    879
    I said no, because I really don't want to be one to put down the third parties who are just getting started with Train Sim World. Cathcart was indeed a great route, one of my absolute favorites in the game, so I can definitely see why one would want Rivet to simply assist with routes.

    But I believe they can eventually pull off a really good route that's a similar quality to what they've made for Train Simulator. They do indeed do some things incorrectly, but if they improve, they will be a great contribution to Train Sim World. Isle of Wight was a pleasant start, Arosalinie was ambitious (although their 2nd route was a bit too early to be ambitious), and West Cornwall Local genuinely looks quite nice. I would purchase WCL if there weren't other routes that I'm intending to get. Basically, if Rivet actually learns from their mistakes, and also improve their sound quality a bit, I can see them being a good third party.
     
    • Like Like x 8
  8. praxidike.meng

    praxidike.meng Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2019
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    347
    Voted 'no', simply because Rivet do bring fresh ideas to this game that probably wouldn't show up if they only assisted DTG. Even if aspects of their route building leave something to be desired, there is a certain passion, a labour of love if you will, that can be felt in their routes. I think they already explained the issue with the distant scenery is a trade-off between detail and performance, and while that shouldn't be an excuse for shoddy route building in the future, it's at least an explanation of their current problems. They released three routes so far and for someone who had to learn from scratch it really isn't so bad. At least to me it seems they are getting better with every new release.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  9. chacal#2181

    chacal#2181 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2021
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    316
    You have a point, still i dont feel in mood to pay full price Dlc for somebody to learn know how.

    Well if call an electrician to do my home wiring and they send me a young apprentice and still chargé me full price for a apprentice job.. Should i be happy, cause he's learning ?
     
    • Like Like x 5
  10. Dinosbacsi

    Dinosbacsi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2017
    Messages:
    1,944
    Likes Received:
    3,326
    I feel like the performance excuse for the poor distant scenery is just pure BS. I mean there are plenty of ways to do performance friendly, yet good looking scenery. The bad distant scenery on either any Rivet or DTG routes is simply because of lack of development time, most likely.

    So I personally don't buy it that routes look like that because of performance reasons. Use low quality models or even 2D planes for distant scenery and they will have practically close to zero effect in performance.

    But I have to agree with what has been said above. I love what Rivet is doing, as they're definitely thinking outside the box. Not only in the terms of routes, but small features as well. Like hoe Arose Line has properly modelled overhead wires with divided sections, or the new water on their new route. I would also like to grt the '38 stock at some point. But they definitely still have some learning to do, and they need to get back at fixing/improving their old content - or let DTG do it with the preservation team.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Winzarten

    Winzarten Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2020
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    484
    For me this Rivet "Saga" demonstrates how big of a jump is the move to TSW and unreal engine is. Rivets addons are amongs the best addons for TS.

    They need to continue developing and build the experience, as I feel like they are improving with each route. Rivets failing flat, and abandonig TSW would definitely not sent the right signal to other third parties thinking about starting to develop for TSW.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2021
    • Like Like x 8
  12. OldVern

    OldVern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,004
    Likes Received:
    8,131
    I voted “Yes” though with the caveat if they up their game then let them back in. The main problem with Rivet seems to be their arrogance. Not only do they put out shoddy work and somehow push it past DTG QA and testing, but then dig in and deny anything is wrong let alone embrace a little humility and rework or fix the stuff. Regardless of the work they did on Cathcart or their previous good Swiss stuff for TS, the fact is West Cornwall is a huge mess. Certainly if I was employing Rivet as a contractor and they delivered up WCL as is, I would not be using them again and likely to be withholding payment, too.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  13. HeyYoPaulie!

    HeyYoPaulie! Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2021
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    379
    The current business model of "let's give other devs access to the software and leave them to it" has, frankly, been a disaster.

    No quality control, no responsibility, no accountability, no action.

    A sensible first step would be for all dev partners (not just Rivet) to support DTG with development. That way they learn how things work, why they work, and what won't / doesn't work in a fully supported environment.

    This would also provide DTG with flexibility in the development of new content, as they can delegate

    We, as the consumers of the product are being asked to pay for this "learning curve". The stark reality is that the quality of content produced by Rivet and Skyhook simply isn't comparable to that produced by DTG, which itself is wildly inconsistent (another massive issue).

    The current business model may make sense to DTG as a publisher - they get paid either way - but it makes zero sense for us as consumers.

    DTG - Either manage expectations better and charge less for the learning curve, or take responsibility and action to ensure quality control and consistency.

    Right now, I have zero confidence in your ability to provide either.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2021
    • Like Like x 10
  14. matinakbary

    matinakbary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,228
    Likes Received:
    3,063
    While the quality of Rivets content is sure not up to DTG standard, I think they still improves. One has to think back to DTG's first german route - RT was a catastrophe regarding safety systems. But it was their first german and I think their 2nd or 3rd overall route for TSW. And now look at the quality of Dresden-Riesa or BML.

    At some point of has to start learning. We just can't expect them to have the highest quality routes from the beginning. IMO RvG already showed that they are indeed willing to improve. And they are looking for help from the community. And are very communicative about their products. This IS the right way, just can only take one step at a time. I'm pretty sure that Rivet's next route will be better than this one. I just like that there is an additional studio providing content, helping to bring diversity to the collection of routes (e.g. new country, diesel countryside routes, new technology like changing signals by interacting with things in Arosa, new wave simulations, new creative collectables, new assets, historic rolling stock etc.). Yeah, i agree - the quality is far from being perfect. But they prove they
    • love trains and are enthusiastic about the railway
    • at least try to get better
    • look for help when the need it
    • communicate with the community.
    And that's why I hope Rivet still produces content for TSW. Because that's the only way to improve.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  15. OldVern

    OldVern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,004
    Likes Received:
    8,131
    Fair comment Matina, but that learning should not come at the cost of £25 a hit to the end customer, who has no comeback unless they get a refund in the two hour window, should the issues not get addressed. This is where not having freely available editors actually hurts DTG. With MSTS, Trainz and TS, everyone who wanted to was able to have a crack at route building, either “git gud” or decide it wasn’t for them. The best of the best then went on to participate in commercial projects having established their reputation in the freeware world.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  16. Rudolf

    Rudolf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    2,095
    Likes Received:
    2,774
    Voted no. Rivet is not that bad. People create a negative mindset around Rivet that is not fully justified. What is going on here proves it is hard to create excellent stuff for TSW2. You see also DTG struggle with it. I think we really need third party developers and support them. You may keep in mind Rivet probably has a fairly low budget to create a route and I generally think they do a good job. let's embrace third party developers instead being very negative. If the product is not good enough for you: don't buy it but we should stop bashing them all the time. If we want them to fix things, buy more products, that gives them the means to spend time on fixing stuff. Same holds for Skyhook an we still need to see how TMG will do in practice.

    I enjoy the Cornwall route as I enjoyed Arosa and Isle of Wight, despite that I would have liked to see more or a better product in some areas.
     
    • Like Like x 10
  17. Purno

    Purno Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2018
    Messages:
    1,955
    Likes Received:
    3,275
    I voted no. Without third parties we're stuck in DTGs endless loop of the same old 3 countries over and over again. I'm very happy Rivet did Arosa.

    I'm also sad Rivet did 2 UK routes. We'll see plenty of UK routes from DTG, so I'd rather have Rivet focus on their Swiss routes.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  18. fanta1682002

    fanta1682002 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2019
    Messages:
    1,137
    Likes Received:
    553
    yes me too
     
  19. JellyScrub

    JellyScrub Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2021
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    139
    I think with some more time they will get there. DTG had issues with their first few routes too (NEC, rapid transit). But they have gotten better. It can't hurt to have Rivet work on more content with DTG, so they can learn the ins and outs. It would also help if they took on more feedback and fixed bugs on older routes. They talk about not having enough time to fix bugs, but surely producing higher quality DLC would lead to more sales. But I don't think banning them from making their own DLCs would be the right move. They have their own take on different features and routes.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. fabristunt

    fabristunt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2019
    Messages:
    635
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    I voted yes. Rivet has proven many times over it has no intention to learn. While it'd like to see more third party devs for TSW, if this is the quality they provide, I strongly believe we are better off without.
     
    • Like Like x 7
  21. OldVern

    OldVern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,004
    Likes Received:
    8,131
    Agree. They have had plenty of chances and continue to fall short. Otherwise it's like giving an employee more than one final warning. As I said earlier, DTG need to consider how they nurture content creation for this currently closed product, bring in more diverse and competent talent.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  22. davidh0501

    davidh0501 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2020
    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    1,564
    Personally I would trust Matt and the team to give Rivet honest advice.
    It’s not for us to second guess what that would be.
    They’ve known the Rivet team for a long time now.
     
    • Like Like x 7
  23. ghawk2005

    ghawk2005 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2020
    Messages:
    484
    Likes Received:
    878
    we shouldn’t have to post feedback and bugs on 3 or 4 different forums to get an accurate simulation DLC. The sense of being ignored or them just doing bare minimum in terms of physics and sounds is not acceptable;e. Yes they have improved some elements but are still light years behind the standard of AP
     
    • Like Like x 2
  24. darujhistan

    darujhistan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2018
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    34
    According to the streams and you tube videos I've seen, I get the impression that it's still very much a learning curve when it comes to using the software 'for all the developers', including DTG, it's just that DTG are much further up the ladder then what Rivet are due to DTG using the software first, so they should have more experience than any 3rd party developer, but they all struggle to use the software regardless, you can see it on their faces, they are frustrated just has much as we are.

    All the developers are still learning how to use the software, maybe we need a lot more patience and understanding, none of us know what goes on behind the scenes, according to Rivet, they are a small team, they do not have the luxury of being able to look back at past products to fix certain things, they fix what they can if they can with in a limited time frame then move on with the next product.

    I think we just need to give them time, let them understand how it all works, what they can do with it, let them improve they're skills and figure out what they are best at.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  25. Lamplight

    Lamplight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2020
    Messages:
    2,519
    Likes Received:
    4,050
    I feel like we should wait for Rivet's next product. In the recent Q&A state-of-the-game stream by Matt and Sam, Matt admitted that DTG mishandled the 3rd party situation and should have worked more closely with them on their own products - either by providing advice or by actively demanding changes where the quality is not acceptable. It'll be interesting to see what (if any) impact this has on the quality of future 3rd party products. Time will tell.
     
  26. Mat_Jam_Ca

    Mat_Jam_Ca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2020
    Messages:
    4,309
    Likes Received:
    8,725
    I would say one last chance. They’ve only done three of their own routes in TSW and (although I haven’t bought it and I’m unlikely to do so unless the sound and physics are sorted out) WCL does look to be their best attempt yet. Helping DTG build routes instead would be great. They did a superb job on Cathcart Circle.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  27. CK95

    CK95 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Messages:
    1,758
    Likes Received:
    4,605
    I think we need to look at Rivet the way we looked at DTG when TSW first released, compare GWE to BML, significant progress has been made and a lot of that is probably down to the experience DTG now have with Unreal.

    I remember from the first WCL preview, Jasper saying they hadn’t done the PIS since DT need to do it, that statement alone tells us that Rivet either don’t have all the knowledge, or don’t have the access to certain areas of the engine.

    Something is definitely failing within Rivets development however, the 204, GE 4/4 & 150 all have serious physics issues (haven’t seen their other units to comment), and scenery is seemingly poor because of performance issues. I have to wonder if these issues are arising because of the method in which they are developing, a lack of unreal experience, or DTG are restricting access to development tools.

    For me it’s strange how two third party devs (skyhook & rivet) are releasing poor content, when in TS they have a pretty good reputation, of course their silence and lack of resolutions on their issues isn’t helping, but something else is clearly wrong.

    I guess the real tell will be when we get TSG content, as previously all their work has been for DTG, this will be their first TSG branded content, so it will be interesting to see if there is any difference in quality, however they do seem to be taking their time with, overall, smaller projects.

    I think Rivet should continue to produce their own DLC, but only if they are confident that they can improve their skill with doing so, but I really think that they should stop shooting themselves in the foot by choosing to make scenic routes.

    Maybe a standalone loco DLC would garner better quality as opposed to a route + new unit, we’ll just have to see.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  28. AirbourneAlex

    AirbourneAlex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2020
    Messages:
    955
    Likes Received:
    1,047
    There's no point having 3rd party developers if there's no public editor and prospect of external sites selling content freely like in TS.
    Everything Skyhook and Rivet do has to go through DTG anyway, that they might as well pool resources and work together.
    If it allows for a better quality product like Cathcart with more frequent updates like preserved content then I would say yes.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  29. OldVern

    OldVern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,004
    Likes Received:
    8,131
    Perhaps they should give Rivet a smaller budget route to work on, one that sells for £9.99 or similar as otherwise their learning curve becomes rather expensive for us consumers at £24.99 a punt.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  30. matinakbary

    matinakbary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,228
    Likes Received:
    3,063
    Nonsense. Rivet as 3rd party decides themselves what route/loco they work on. DTG doesn't dictate that. If you think 25 is too much for the route they produce (which as a opinion is totally fine), don't buy it then.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  31. OldVern

    OldVern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,004
    Likes Received:
    8,131
    Believe me, I won't spend £25 if they churn out junk like WCL again...
    However I stand by the point that with WCL (maybe Arosa too) Rivet bit off more than they can chew. The route reminds me of the original Marias Pass in MSTS, assembled by someone who may well be a good artist but has no real understanding of how a railway works. Otherwise explain the lack of lineside fencing, the stupid gradients through the stations at Truro, Redruth and Camborne.
    In fact, cuss it. Give them a model railway to work on and they might just about deliver a useful route to drive.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  32. solicitr

    solicitr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2020
    Messages:
    8,434
    Likes Received:
    12,310
    One thing that commenters have overlooked is that Rivet do absolutely outstanding visual models of locos. The BR 204 in particular is a work of art, to look at; the Ge 4/4 is brilliant.

    Unfortunately they can't seem to master the Simugraph/physics side of loco building.
     
    • Like Like x 6
  33. OldVern

    OldVern Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,004
    Likes Received:
    8,131
    Now that I can agree on. Their RhB stuff in TS is excellent, too.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  34. meridian#2659

    meridian#2659 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2021
    Messages:
    1,287
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    On the ge 4/4 i like they modeled the engine room too. Thats why i think the mistakes of rivet is not about being lazy.

    They are just learning right from release to release.
    I like the suggestion from somebody here, that devs should work as 2rd party creator first to learn the editor and how to get things done properly.

    As much as i hate those bugs, i can also enjoy many things on their routes and locos. So i support them with no refunds etc, because i think they should not giving up on tsw2.
     
  35. Rob39

    Rob39 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2018
    Messages:
    1,713
    Likes Received:
    1,610
    If they wont allocate themselves the necessary time then absolutely. Let someone else build the route. Some of WCL the scrubland, beach areas are really well done, but sadly most of the route is super rushed and sub par.
     
  36. Disintegration7

    Disintegration7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Messages:
    1,059
    Likes Received:
    1,687
    I originally voted "other", since i generally think it's up to Rivet to decide what it makes.

    But i changed my vote to "no", as I've been playing WCL all weekend and I'm really enjoying it. It absolutely has issues (no station PIS- how is that still a thing?), but with the NTP layers, there's actually quite a bit going on, and the topography of the route itself makes for some challenging driving to keep close to the timetable. It has that "one more run" factor to it (at least for me).

    OTOH, and probably an unpopular opinion, but I think Glasgow might be the most boring route in the game- every time i decide to try again, I run one service and I'm done.

    I'll run IOW every once in a while and have fun- it's a quick palate cleanser after something more intense. Arosa is less fun for me, but honestly I think i just don't like narrow gauge mountain railroading- so that's totaly on me to buyer beware.
     
  37. Alex_m30x#7297

    Alex_m30x#7297 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2021
    Messages:
    419
    Likes Received:
    441
    I think they can really do scenery and train models, but can be bad on simulating
     
    • Like Like x 1
  38. nwp1

    nwp1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2019
    Messages:
    1,218
    Likes Received:
    784
    The WCL is awful especially around the St. Ives branch line. I hope Rivet continue to work on improving it but doubt they will. So DTG should step in and make it more realistic like London Commuter.

    Rivet are pretty good at replicating stations and locomotives but cannot design scenery at all, which is absolutely dreadful.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  39. stujoy

    stujoy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2019
    Messages:
    5,198
    Likes Received:
    13,644
    I’m thinking that there are only a handful of people who can use Simugraph well enough to get the train physics right. I don’t think any of them work for Rivet. For the best trains in TSW the setup of the physics is done by people who don’t work for DTG either. I’m guessing Simugraph and the whole TSW system are just too complex to use well in the timeframes people have to get the DLC out. It’s alright making good looking loco models but if what’s inside doesn’t work well then you end up with a Lamborghini on the outside and a broken Lada on the inside. That’s what Rivet currently make.

    Their overview of the services a route requires and the scope of the gameplay is a bit off the mark too, and that might be down to their route and train choices but the way they messed up the Arosa timetable defies explanation. Scenery is hit and miss with them but I think they can easily get that right in the future, as they have had the feedback they require from the community. Getting the skills to get the physics right may not be as easy. It could be said about other third party creators too, as Skyhook have been asking on the forum for train horn sounds while saying stuff that amounts to ‘we know nothing about trains.’

    DTG have had to step in at the last minute to rescue Rivet routes both in train physics (Arosa) and the whole scope of the route (Cornwall) and that isn’t good. Isle of Wight kind of stands out as their best DLC because it does what it is meant to do better than the others, so where it may look that they are improving is some ways when you see what they did on Cathcart for DTG, the overall quality of their own content is getting worse as it increases in complexity and size. Maybe they’ll get there eventually.

    I think with what DTG added to WCL, the route has some interest for me and will likely buy it in a sale later down the line but the state of the 150’s physics means that train isn’t going to be as enjoyable to drive and will take a back seat to me getting even more use out of the better quality old DTG trains on the route. It shouldn’t be like that though, the 150 should be the star of the show, if you conveniently forget that there should have been an HST anyway.

    Anyway, there are some thoughts on it. No conclusions as to whether they should just do contract work but as others have said they can make content that DTG won’t ever make and could bring new ideas to the table, but the quality needs to improve as well. Voted ‘don’t know’ because of that.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  40. RobSkip

    RobSkip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2018
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    487
    If Rivet turn around after WCL and actually want to learn and do better, I'm all for it, but as it stands they simply aren't learning from mistakes. The issues with the 150 are ridiculously basic things to get wrong, and massively echo the 204 (which could be vaugely excused in itself as their first product), but to get things wrong a second time (and things DTG have done competently in the meantime) is just silly. Unfortunately I expect most people's opinions of Rivet have already been made (myself included), and it takes a lot more to change an existing opinion than one that doesn't exist. I don't think Rivet are lazy, just that they have a very different internal standard for their products than the community do, and that probably goes for Skyhook aswell. After all if they were truly lazy they wouldn't take the time to make up some of their fantastic excuses (because 150s are so old that every manual has been lost to time, of course, despite the fact some TOCs still just use amended versions of the original BR manuals).

    The 204 is a DTG model, and the Ge 4/4 II is good but has some odd inaccuracies, like the size of the lights.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  41. Lamplight

    Lamplight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2020
    Messages:
    2,519
    Likes Received:
    4,050
    Let me take a shot in the dark here. Maybe it's experience with real-world engineering that's lacking. We know that Simugraph basically simulates the (real) underlying engineering of a loco and simulates its driving based on that whereas TS (which Rivet is more used to) is a black-box model that "fakes" the characteristics of the locos. While I don't know what went wrong with the other engines, we have official confirmation that Rivet implemented the wrong type of transmission in the 204 resulting in it having nothing to do with a real 204 from a driving point of view. I could imagine that similar "real-world engineering" issues may have crept into their other locos.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  42. meridian#2659

    meridian#2659 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2021
    Messages:
    1,287
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Its a bit Off Topic, but even in real trains there are such mistakes as "diesel hydraulic transmission - errors".

    Turned out the Class 52 had a mismatch of the maybach engine to the voith transmission, which could end in the loco couldnt reach its full speed in sertain situations. Would be interessting to know if swindon works was aware before starting the production.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  43. SHINO BAZ

    SHINO BAZ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,877
    Likes Received:
    1,372
    Hold on one minute why is rivet game get hammered so hard?Why are some of you acting like dtg is turning out perfect dlc every dtg release if full of issues,they say you lead be the example you set,so rivets sees how dtg shoddy dlc work get released and snapped up by the masses who don't wait to see what's wrong with it first,then they complain about it after,so rivet games sees how they work and does the same.The ones to blame are the ones who buy the shoddy dlc the moment it released showing dtg&rivets that people will buy there stuff no matter if works right or not.You get what you pay for and some here will pay weather it works or not.

    But i would have to say i really think rivet games does put in more effort then dtg.They brought the 1st german deisel to the game something dtg didn't seem in a hurry to do,and when the db br 204 was show to have issuse the got them fixed faster then dtg ever fixed anything.

    Note....dtg and there 3rd party teams are not totally blameness but neither are the one who buy there dlc sight unseen broken or not,giving dtg and there 3rd parties no incentive to do the work better.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  44. redrev1917

    redrev1917 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2021
    Messages:
    2,221
    Likes Received:
    4,560
    No - whilst I personally wont pay full price for their current routes they do seem enjoyable and some if not all are enjoying playing and I dont think anyone can deny that they are improving with every release.

    I'll wait until a sale before picking up Cornwall, but then more often then not I dont buy any DLC at full price.
     
  45. Crosstie

    Crosstie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    2,887
    Likes Received:
    5,736
    I voted " No ".

    1. Based on the forum's overall response to WCL and the 150/2, the result of the poll is a self fulfilling prophecy. Sorry, londonmidland, but you clearly designed the poll to underscore your own opinion.

    2. To vote yes is presumptuous and overweening. Rivet has a perfect right to market whatever product they want.

    3. It will have no effect on either Rivet or DTG. DTG have already said they will continue to publish Rivet's products.

    4. We desperately need 3rd party developers in the game and they need to be encouraged.

    5. Rivet is very capable of producing quality products. UE and Simugraph are difficult to work with. When you're just starting out, inconsistency is to be expected.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2021
    • Like Like x 10
  46. Shaun123

    Shaun123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    912
    At the end of the day, what we think is irrelevant, if Rivet want to continue with DLC, then it’s down to them, who are we to say otherwise.

    The only way Rivet/DTG will sit up and pay attention, is if the sale figures reflect this.

    As usual, you have people saying they won’t buy it, but still will. And it’s not the “don’t like it, don’t buy it” attitude, by the way. But if you continue to contribute to the revenue, you are part of the problem.

    It’s worth pointing out; I’m a supporter of Rivet, but WCL has been a slight letdown for me.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  47. solicitr

    solicitr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2020
    Messages:
    8,434
    Likes Received:
    12,310
    The 204 has never been fixed, and according to Rivet will never be. The transmission model is simply dead wrong.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  48. matinakbary

    matinakbary Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,228
    Likes Received:
    3,063
    Well.. i don't think the 204 can be fixed if I understand correctly. It's nearly the same amount of work as rebuilding it from scratch.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  49. SHINO BAZ

    SHINO BAZ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,877
    Likes Received:
    1,372
    From what i have seen the db br 204 works just fine,so is what you speak of a really serious problem or just being overly critical because you consider it less then perfect for your own liking?
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2021
  50. solicitr

    solicitr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2020
    Messages:
    8,434
    Likes Received:
    12,310
    Its driving characteristics are nothing like the real one. This isn't "nitpicking" about "less than perfect" (which I don't do, I'm way more tolerant of minor infelicities than a lot of players), but this is simply a violation of the fundamental idea of "simulation."

    It's at least as bad as Arosa's physics screwup, but since it didn't cause derailments it didn't engender as much howling.
     
    • Like Like x 7

Share This Page