Standard Route Features - Can We Set A List Up For Dtg

I would have to disagree- an engineer change would not return a loco to "dark and cold." Certainly a hotswap in the middle of a passenger run would not dump the brake pipe! On DB, the standard for passenger halts is 1B on the brake lever, not full service.

More annoying is beginning services from the timetable and getting a train with no brakes set, on a grade. While I understand the reasoning (the game doesn't distinguish between default state for player locos and trailing locos), and you don't want brakes cut in on the trailers, nonetheless I think this is a distinction the devs need to look into.

In a hotswap, the lights, safety systems and wipers etc would all be running.

 

Not suggesting cold and dark - but you are right that the brakes don't necessarily need to be in the full service position. All I really want is to be able to take over a train without having it accidentally roll through a red light

 

Does a 'hot' state include having all safety systems already active?

 

No, because SS are off by default (I would like to add my vote for a Settings toggle to control this)

 

This is not a 'hot state' in my book.
I agree, there should be a switch in setting we set to have them all turned on by default. I understand the need to not scare away newcomers with PZB on their first drive but don't punish the rest of us. The fact that all the safety systems isolation switches are 'sliders' and not single click irritates me even more.

 

For the purposes of gameplay, having something like driver vigilance on by default would be utterly infuriating for me as the noise drives me insane. AWS on the other hand, I always turn on on UK routes as it offers a useful gameplay feature. In this case, an all-on or all-off default setting has no use, so I'm absolutely fine with the way things are now for safety system status

 

My idea for the safety systems toggle is seperate it by country

Examples:

UK Safety Systems (on/off)
German Safety Systems (on/off)
US Safety Systems (on/off)

Or vary the difficulty on them

Easy - the easiest safety system (DSD, DVD, Sifa, Alerter)
Medium - the above plus one more advanced system (AWS, LZB, ETCS)
Hard - the above with all safety systems on (PZB, ATC/ACSES)

But that's my thoughts, feel free to question or query it and I'll try to elaborate further

 

Excuse me for stating the glaringly obvious... Surely the number one standard route feature we should all expect is smooth frame rates along the entire route without the judders and stutters as well as some really ugly popups ruining the immersion experience.

Having recently upgraded from Ps4 to Ps5 I am very impressed how the Ps4 version of TSW2 and routes run. The Ps5 version of TSW2 is on the whole really good and the visual improvements are great on most routes but the Brighton Mainline route still suffers from stuttering.

Given the massive increase in hardware capability with the PS5 it seems that the PS5 version of BML is still not optimised properly and I have decided to keep a separate PS4 TSW2 install on an external SSD on the PS5 so I can use BML without the stutter.

Given the number of reports on here about stuttering and performance issues on PS5 TSW3 I will not be buying it so my days as a customer are over.

Fixing the performance issues has got to be DTG's top priority. I am happy to do without changeable weather and opening umbrellas in exchange for a smooth and immersive train driving experience and as such will stick to BOTH the Ps4 and Ps5 versions of TSW2 on PS5 until I see these issues addressed and fixed.

 

That isn't a "feature." That goes to the core of the engine and fundamental game programming.
It's like telling your wife that her wardrobe should include "lose 20 pounds"

 

I would completely expect a rail driving simulator to feature smooth graphics to realistically depict movement as an absolute minimal requirement. Blaming the "core of the engine and game programming" is really no excuse for shortcomings that need addressing. It seems that every other title I own seems to manage the "core of the engine and game programming" to the point that the product is acceptable and enjoyable and DTG should realise they are falling well short in delivering what is expected of them.

If upgrades to the engine or new coding techniques are required then the release of TSW3 was the perfect opportunity to introduce them. Maybe that would have created a product without performance issues and persuaded me to remain a customer.

It is more like agreeing that there are irreconcilable differences and I have decided to end the relationship with DTG under amicable terms.

 

I haven't touched a console since the 1990s but I am assuming the console versions have graphics settings to optimise performance to your liking in the same way the PC version does?

 

No. Pc players get more graphical options. Consoles only get like resolution and motion blur. The graphics are already preset for you and you can't change it

 

Wow, I never knew that. That is quite limiting.

 

Oh, yes:

• UK routes: track should be continually fenced; no US-style "open access"

 

For Uk routes
(This is a general feature) but custom interior designs for trains being implemented,
More catenary accuracy and types (there’s a thread going in-depth on the types of catenary) as some of the OHLE varies from line to line thread explaining in detail (https://forums.dovetailgames.com/threads/british-overhead-line-equipment-guide.40540/)
automatic train announcements
station announcements
more realistic npcs
accurate timetables and errors
quick driving routes
Well Detailed and accurate stations
Darker OHLE wire
Functioning Neutral Sections
more accurate track design
i think that’s all i can think of

 

UK routes should use correct font on trackside speed signage - so far I think only BKL has had this

 

For me, the one most important requirement for a train driving sim is that every run can be completed end-to-end, whether in easy mode with HUD and no safety systems, or "real" mode with no HUD and safeties on. I should be able to hop on any train on any route at random, by timetable or journey, and know that I'll be able to reach the finish line without being blocked by an AI train or a rogue signal, or being randomly derailed. Cosmetics like sounds, weather, etc are nice to have, but the trains and routes themselves absolutely need to just work.

 

This thread is rapidly veering away from providing existing items (as in done, already appeared in a TSW DLC) for a checklist to ensure that future releases are consistent in features and quality across both DTG and third parties, to another ‘I want X, Y, Z’ thread.

I don’t believe that was the point of the OP and these posts are now diluting what were otherwise some really good suggestions to improve the game going forward. I ain’t no mod, but perhaps a fresh thread for all the ‘wishlist’ type items would better to stop this added white noise, as I’m a bit worried the useful stuff is starting to get lost and the posts with suggestions for the checklist are drying up as a result.

I think this is one of the best engagement threads we’ve had in an awful long time, it would be a shame for its impact to wane through it veering wildly off topic. DTG JD, what do you think?

Just IMHO.

 

I agree. Lets keep this thread going though. Folks please don't just say what youy want. It has to be functional. For reference please read from op post onwards. Lets not ruin this thread

 

Yep, this thread is a great one for DTGs reference but it is slowly veering off the course a bit, if you excuse the pun, get back on track everyone , my idea was viable though, after that it has slowly veered into a normal I want this, that and everything thread, c'mon now

 

Good idea but sadly, it makes no sense. You can't use LZB if PZB is not active.

 

Ah OK, then put PZB & LZB in the same rating

 

A couple more:

• US routes should always have whistleposts
• Scenarios that involve cab changes need to allow sufficient time to make the walk and set up the new cab; almost none of the extant ones do
• A service should never start on a grade with de-activated brakes (I'm looking at you, Moss Turn)

 

Thanks for sharing this. It is good to have. Did you talk to the QA team? It is typically their task to check if these requirements are met.
You may rewrite them as a requirements set. There are number of ways doing this and there are excellent courses to learn how to do that. It think it would be very helpful for DTG as a company to have that.

I would recommend to stay away from solutions. Baked tunnel lights is a solution, not a proper function for a route. Not sure how to say this in requirements language.

Have all licenses approved is not a very good requirement. I would formulate it it globally:

A DLC shall use content in agreement with the licenses in order to avoid legal issues that may require to withdraw content You probably still can do better. Then you need to detail it out for all decals and maybe you require some documentation, so you can demonstrate compliance to this requirement.

Btw into my opinion QA should not be the party to test if the content is technically working properly. That task is for the devs.QA should do far more global check and to be honest, beta testers should not be able to find lots of issues.

 

You definitely must assign priorities and adapt the list for each DLC. What I normally do is two things:

Set a priority to High, Medium or Low and get an estimate from the devs for the amount of work, ranging Low, Medium, High
If you combine these, you get a matrix with nine fields which is very helpful to set priorities. It probably is the task of a producer to set the order in which each feature is implemented. One core thing is: each feature you implement MUST work properly.

If a feature is a lot of work to build, consider if you can split it into stages, so you make it smaller and more manageable. If you make it small, it is easier to track progress and is easier to decide to use a simplified feature.
I would like to add one very general thing: each feature shall be used at least in one scenario or it shall be documented for the players. It is pointless to create undocumented features, like I already have seen a lot of them. It would be good to require a learning aspect for each scenario.

 

I do think you misinterpret the realms of responsibility of QA and beta. QA is there precisely to test if everything is working properly. Their job is under the hood, so to speak; oversimplified, "Does the game crash?" Matters like holes in scenery, tunnel lighting or poor sound are what beta testing is for.

 

BINGO! This one wins.
First time I tried this one when new to Clinchfield I lost the train looking for a way to stop it and ran it off the tracks doing 90mph. A helpless and frustrated feeling. All it did was teach me to trust nothing in Clinchfield even leaving a string of cars on a siding.

 

Wow, this is a long list already and it can be much longer. May I ask something?
What next?

Let try to answer the question a bit, from my experience with IT. The next thing is to translate this for a specific route. Each feature should have a priority, initially low, medium or high will do and a work estimate. For this you also can use low, medium, high. For each DLC DTG definitely has a budget, so you can order each checklist item in order of importance. Then you can draw a rough line. These items are going to make it, those may be in the final game if we are lucky and the rest, bad news, they will not make it to the game.

This looks like a lot of work, but you do not need very accurate estimations for each item, they will be wrong anyway but the overall picture can be very accurate. It would be interesting if DTG can be more transparent on features and costs. We can then help to think about it. Are working level crossings and elevators really important enough to justify the costs, compared to f.i. many supported paths for scenarioplanner).

The key thing is, even though we may think all features are important, DTG needs to choose. The choices are the interesting part of this discussion.

 

Excellent idea and for the German Safety Systems these are also used in Austria ÖBB therefore it should be
US Safety Systems
German & Austrian Safety Systems
UK Safety Systems

 

Fair enough, that would only say Austrian when an Austrian route is added into the game though

 

I disagree. I quite like PIS being automatically set up correctly for me, although it'd be nice if the player could adjust it as they see fit.



Did anyone mention the red signals after each station stop turning green only after the doors are closed?
Or not having enough time to set-up your train at the start of a service/scenario?

 

Just do a seperate toggle for each of the safety systems. You're never gonna find a grouping that everybody likes.

Just because I like AWS and LZB enabled (because those are actually useful) doesn't mean I want the DSD or Sifa (which are just annoyances).

Also, you could argue that AWS and LZB actually make the game easier, rather than harder. Never really understood why several high speed German routes have LZB disabled by default, but the KVB system is enabled by default on SEHS and LGV.

 

Yes, it's on my list. re The PIS, I’d hazard a guess that’s because there isn’t enough set up time allocated at the start of the service. It’s pretty standard in TSC to set the train up properly including PIS, GSM-R, lights etc.

 

Here's a thought, how about checking that each route is set up correctly to have the "new" tag go away within a reasonable time of it being installed, the way it did for the TSW3 core routes?

 

Having option in the settings to turn on or off the safety systems at the start of the would solve the issue of those wanting to start with safety systems on, and those not wanting to start with them on would be a good thing to have?

 

• Police and ambulance sirens should be appropriate to the country
• Highway lane markers should be appropriate to the country
• Vehicles should drive on the right in US, German and other non-UK routes

 

The reason why I had to do this is that all the German routes we have have one form or another Austrian locomotives running through them. Best example is going to be Hauptstrecke München Augsburg DB Baureihe 182 derivative ÖBB Baureihe 1016/1116 running freight Railjet Eurocity Blauer Enzian Nightjet Stuttgart Röm/Venice and Kalman Imre To Budapest Keleti via HMA.

 

Yeah, Austria and Germany use the same safety systems but the toggle would say 'Germany Safety Systems' until an Austrian route was made then it would say 'Germany & Austria Safety Systems' or 'European Safety Systems' to incorporate France & Switzerland too and their respective systems

 

Spot on but for European Safety Systems we do have the proper routes for it being Bahnstrecke Olten Sursee Luzern & LGV Méditerranée Avignon Marseille St Charles. The first route has ZUB Integra Signum & ETCS while LGV has TVM-430 & KVB

 

It would be per country as well so within the toggle the different countries will be listed and also the different systems as well

 

Keep the safety options simple - the more complex the less likely DTG will implement it.
As I suggested a couple of pages back:

Vigilance system on by default [NO/yes]
Safety systems on by default [NO/yes]

...should do the trick.
Absolutely no need to separate by country.

 

Especially since they map directly onto the existing universal keyboard commands, shift-enter and control-enter

 

That's your opinion, my viewpoint is leaning towards those who like one country's safety systems and dislikes the others, so separating it by country makes sense from my POV but I can see your argument regarding complexity

 

Not sure if it's been mentioned but in addition to this:

• Vehicles should be era appropriate.

Please do not release Linke Rheinstrecke with those modern vehicles. Just wanted to get that out there early.


Cheers

 

Great to hear! Are there any updates on this? Have they found the root cause? Thanks for keeping us so well updated Matt!

 

Thought I would expand on this just a bit, because every US route seems to get this wrong.

1. YELLOW is used to separate traffic in opposite directions. On a dual carriageway, there will be a solid yellow line on the median/barrier side. On two-lane roads, there will be a single dashed line where passing is permitted, a double solid line where it is not, and a solid line beside a dashed line where overtaking is permitted from one lane but not the other.
2. WHITE is used for all other markings. Besides dividing the lanes on multi-lane highways (dashed), there are also always solid white lines on the outside (shoulder sides) of the road.
3. Very low-traffic roads in the backcountry don't get any stripes at all.

 

I have a suggestion, that is hopefully more quantitative. I get nervous posting in forums but I'm a big train sim fan.

Everyone has mentioned this, but even if a route has say 200 standard daily services and it's a straight-line service complete from end to end; would it not be better served by incorporating more AI services throughout the length of the route? So, in the case that it is in the best interest to focus on making a route feel immersive, you can focus on the driveable services, whilst having a separate team focused on structuring the AI services (i mean i don't work there, so i don't know for sure). I think every player can agree, it would be amazing to see a PIS board full of services around going to different locations, with the ability to railfan from the platform, even if the route itself only included 200 playable services.

For example, LIRR is super underserved (and I say this as a frequent rider of rail in the NYC region). At Jamaica station for example there are trains arriving and leaving non-stop throughout the day. Even if I couldn't play those services, just the feel and the complexity of navigating in and out of those connecting stations would make it more enjoyable. What LIRR got right is it has a TON of route choices, which makes it something I go back to often, even though the lack of services and AI leaves it feeling kind of boring. A simple update to this service alone could probably drive revenue because of how much potential the route has.

A route that does service volume amazingly is the "London Commuter, Brighton to Victoria" - it has 1,000+ playable services and it feels like one of the most complete routes in TSW. If there was more AI at Clapham Junction, and even the inclusion of passenger announcements (in my personal opinion it would be the most immersive route you all have).

But, this same concept could, and maybe should be considered when structuring other routes too!

If someone is paying $50 USD (or 41 Pounds, etc.) or more for a route bundle, the hope is that they're getting the most immersion and gameplay out of the experience.

Side suggestions:
-Adopting more in-cab train announcements would be amazing, especially on passenger routes. Rivet games recently added that and it just makes me want to play the Scotrail Express route again and again.
-Improving US rail PIS boards to include more authentic on-platform experience at stations
-Adding more detailed train sounds and balancing the sound transitions (moving from the driver's cab to the passenger cab, leaving from the driver's cab to the platform, etc.)
-Track junction noises could see improvement, the sound of the wheels against the rails and when going over junctions.

Otherwise, a great game with a ton of potential.