Train Sim World 2 - London Commuter First Screens!

Even if the 387 will be used on 3rd rail only I don’t see why they haven’t replicate the AC/DC switchover as it was already simulated for the 395 ( yeah for this one the catenary was used )

 

Above all else it is nice to see what we thought wouldn't appear yet in TSW, Clapham Junction due to no Class 450, Class 458, Class 442 now since coming back into service due to SWR. So to those who thought this route wouldn't appear, well. This is very good, but they probably have either fourth party or seventh party working on routes.

 

I notice that the count of 29 stations mentioned would indicate that we are not getting Hove, Reedham or Coulsdon Town stations - which is fair enough in that they're not strictly part of the route, but I was hoping that we might see them included given their proximity to the mainline and level of service interaction.

Note and echo others' concern about the look of Reigate station - I suspect what may have happened is that it is a placeholder building that is roughly the right shape and size when seen from the top down (which is how the routes appear to be built with the Google Maps overlay). I'm fairly sure they'll fix it for release but it would be good to get confirmation of this from a DTG representative - perhaps in the roadmap stream on Tuesday if not sooner.

Other than that, very happy with the look of everything (wonky cranes aside) and really looking forward to playing!

 

Is there a route where LZB has been used? If not then yes I would say that applies.
We don't yet have an OHLE route where the electrostar would run, and if we did I'm sure DTG would build yet another version of it to match rather than reusing and reskinning what we already have... because that's what they do (inefficient as that may be)

 

That's sometimes true, but in this case these are genuine concerns.

No-one is expecting perfection, just a reasonably accurate rendition of stations and other artifacts.

No idea what that sentence means.

 

Yes the 387s are equipped with dual voltage but why would you be annoyed because of a lack of a pantograph when you can't use it since the line to Brighton is third rail and not OHLE hence no pantograph is not needed.

 

There are no routes where the 101 runs in timetable mode that have LZB fitted, but in reality they run on the munich-augsburg route, which does have LZB.

 

What about running it on other routes, I.e GWE or GCC. That’s what I want to do, and if it looks wrong I’m gonna be annoyed.

 

I'm not that familiar with UK emus and I probably wouldn't notice or care about a missing pantograph to be honest. But I do sympathize with those who will notice its absence if it isn't modeled. There is something to be said for authenticity, after all. I'm still upset about the missing cruise control on the ACS64, which UK players probably are unaware of or indifferent to.

 

The 387 being duel voltage is a key feature of the train, just because the BML is a 3rd rail only route doesn't mean they should leave out features, if there's a pantograph on the train in real life, there should be one in game as well. They can't claim TSW is a ‘highly accurate and detailed rail simulation’ if they aren't going to bother actually simulating stuff. It would be a huge disappointment if they didn't fully simulate it, and there wouldn't be a valid excuse.

 

Exactly Trainiac. i presume there wouldn’t be a particular reason they wouldn’t include the dual voltage functionality other than development time

 

Nothing is confirmed yet. It could be the angle of the shot could be the reason why it looks like there's no pantograph. We should find out more on Thursday.

 

That was cancelled long ago, the 442s are going to be replaced by 458s.

 

With regard to Reigate, they would have been better off porting over one of the original RS/RW generic buildings and canopy than what they appear to have done. You might get away otherwise on a freeware route but not where the individual pack is coming in at £24.99 (without the Season Pass). No one expects 100% authenticity, every culvert or blade of grass in the right place but it at least needs to resemble the prototype.

 

I don't understand what all the fuss is about the Class 387/2 pantograph. There is no way one could tell if there is or is not a pantograph from that angle. I have extreme doubts that DTG would not at least model the pantograph, and we know that they have the tech to simulate multiple power systems. Habt Geduld!

Cheers

 

Well the TGV duplex had a pantograph setting for AC or something a line that wasn’t in the game but you could select the option so I got High hopes with it working on the 387 and for the scrolling pis on the 377 I wonder if it will scroll in the carriage

 

It’s not because they aren’t gonna model it, it’s wether it works. If you can’t press the buttons to raise the pantograph, then I’m gonna be Angry.

 

There's no sense in getting twisted before you even know whether it works. Again, patience.

Cheers

 

What makes you think we will find out on Thursday? The stream is TBC and I'm assuming it'll be the Meissen branch if anything new.

 

Nope for the TGV we use both pantograph the DC one between Marseille and the start of the LGV the you switch to the AC while entering it it’s just that DTG was lazy and modeled most of the 1.5KV DC catenary with the 25KV 50Hz AC one

 

I did see at least 2 types of concrete ties in the screenshots.

 

I think the best solution would be since a pantograph is not used on third rail it should be on the train but purely for aesthetic reasons i.e. remain in the down position for BML services. I agree dual voltage is a key feature on the Class 387 but you can’t simulate dual voltage on the BML as it runs on third rail.

If DTG was to include the Class 387 on the GWR commuter services out of London Paddington that is when you would be able to simulate dual voltage, which is much more appropriate than on the BML.

 

Firstly, it's a part of the train. Basically that's like saying there's no point of having all the power options on the ICE in the menu, although idk if it's simulated or not.
Secondly, scenario planner exists giving people the option to put the train on GWE.
And thirdly, if they happened to want to use the 387 in the future, that means they have more work to do in order to add the missing systems to the train. It'd be better to have it in from day one if you ask me.

 

Whats wrong with the cranes? They do look like the ones they actually had by the power station in real life.

 

The operators cab is also tilted. Nevermind the cable physics and the poor operator who would feel sick working in that thing, it also just looks very odd and sticks out like a sore thumb, even to the untrained eye.

No, it's not core to the driving experience, but it does pose some questions for DTG's scenery building process.

 

One Question from Outside the UK: Is it worth to put in the SE (Class 465) Layers for BML? I have download some Train Maps for London Transportation and it looks like the 465 only Appear in London Victoria and goes/leave direct in a Portal Ingame?!
No other Stations on the Way of the lovely 465's, i'm right?
Ok, for the Immersion is "Ok", but the Performance?! I dont know if these Layers worth it.

By the Way: The BML is by Miles my absolute Favorite Route for the "Rush Hour Ticket". But when i see the Inaccuracies on the Articles Photos and the Reallife Pictures shared here from other Users...the BML will be the most (negative) Discussed Route out there (if nothing will rebuild)

And some more i see in the Article Pictures: The 465's have a working Destination Board. The 465 in SEHS didnt work right?!

 

You're correct that the 465s, and I assume 375s too, leave the route almost immediately. I'm not sure how much that is going to affect performance, especially on lower end machines, but if you ask me, London Victoria would have felt too quite without the SE traffic. And no, the destination boards did work on the 465 in SEHS. You couldn't interact with it and change the destination, which I don't anticipate changing for a while, but they were implemented.

 

The same would be true of any trains going from Brighton on the ECW or WCW routes. They leave Brighton and bear off within a few hundred yards.

Difference is that at peak times Victoria has a train leaving or arriving about every minute and a half, and loads of those are the SouthEasterrn side, so it would be... limiting NOT having the 465/375 services in place even if they're not drivable or playable in any sense

Having waited at the lights just outside the station on a train from Rochester and seeing the Southern trains come and go I'm hoping they simulate this in game (ie sauntering past on a run to Brighton and seeing a big blue box standing at a signal at danger)

 

From my own selfish opinion, layers are always worth it. If your machine or console can’t handle it, then I can only advise for you to upgrade or lower your graphics.

 

About the cranes, DTG used a High-Top crane, but in realife there are Luffing Jib cranes used.

https://www.liebherr.com/en/usa/pro...es/top-slewing-cranes/top-slewing-cranes.html

 

Which don't have the cab at the same angle as the boom, and the jib lines don't "hang at 45 degrees"...
Either way they're a bit of a sore thumb

 

I can't help but smile a bit when I read about "small inaccuracies" with the trains visuals.
This is exactly the same topic we had back when the 112 for Hamburg Lübeck was released, which is not correct either. People from other countries often said they don't get the fuzz about it and that it looked fine to them. Well now you are in our shoes

In the end, the less you know about these routes the better it will look to you personally,since you cannot compare what you might see everyday from a locals point of view. Someone here said german stations were so well done, and while I don't disagree, you could let someone who lives at these places have a look at them, and undoubtedly they will find inaccuracies too.
BTW, someone also said that they would put more effort into german routes compared, as seen with the recent Dresden, and then there was something about the Cathcart team as well. You have to bear in mind that Cathcart scenery was (apparently) mostly done by Rivet games, and for Riesa-Dresden they had at least two second party contractors working on scenery and the rails themselves known from the german railfan community, who had put enormous effort into this project to make it the best experience possible.

It might make a difference as to who works on which project, as with some routes one could say that you can see when someone just did the required minimum, and where someone put in extra effort...
Just look at the Boston route, where a certain someone was heavily involved and even put in the extra effort of changing the catenary post release, and who wants to do a signaling manual (feels weird to use such a word in a DTG forum )

 

Along with what your saying I think West croydon should be added as its no more than a mile from selhurst and would give some metro routes for the 377 going from Victoria to West croydon which I think would be a nice little journey
And if the 455s were made it would give the 455s a full service to run instead of going from Victoria to East croydon or South croydon where it branches off I believe

 

I've been on services from Victoria to West croydon via selhurst not all of them go round crystal Palace
And some go to Epsom so they could still add West croydon for services

 

They could keep adding and adding til the route reaches every terminus, but the question is whether it makes sense to add in these things. If the services to those stations are made up of the assets we have then fine, if not (and they could be better populated with additional DLC later) then they should stick to the main route for now

 

I think a lot of people are "whistling dixie" as far as additional branches and stations are concerned. Reigate, Redhill and Quarry are the only variations from the main line that will come with the route. As far as additional trains being layered in, no details have been given to my knowledge. I suppose it's OK to daydream, but I think we will get only whatever runs on the route as announced.

 

With regard to Reigate, it would be useful for someone from DTG to post here to let us know one way or the other if the picture in question is in fact Reigate and whether it represents the station as will be featured in the game.

This would potentially avoid grief and possibly baseless speculation.

 

I doubt any more branches or stations will be added.

But the reason why people are speculating about layers is because they do mention it in the article...

"Additional layers are also added for a variety of units and locomotives, making this an incredibly busy route at certain times of the day. You can find out more about these in our next article!"

But they just need to be patient and wait and we will find out what layers.

 

I agree, we need some clarification on this. Because if that is how they intend Reigate to release I am worried. I can forgive alot. But I know this route well and that is not Reigate

 

I'd like to echo the above. It would be much appreciated if someone from DTG could comment if the picture in the article will be representative of what Reigate looks like in the final release. The community have been very patient waiting for this route which was initially supposed to release in Summer, and considering the delay the screenshots so far are somewhat disappointing. Taking extra time to get the route 'right' is great but that doesn't seem to have happened here.

To be met with a wall of silence is frustrating yet not particularly surprising.

 

They don't have working toilets, either. Unplayable!

 

That's rather different, because cruise control is an important operating and gameplay feature. A working pantograph on a third-rail route is just cosmetic, about as important as the heater control switch.

 

Dual voltage capability is a fairly fundamental part of the 387s, to not include it would just further show the route as rushed

 

Dual voltage is only fundamental on routes that is required to use dual voltage, such as on the GWML line out of Paddington. Unless other lines are being proposed, such as the Milton Keynes to East Croydon service via the West London Line, which does use dual voltage, I do not see it included on the Brighton Main Line as it is not required due to it being a third rail only route. If dual voltage is included then I'd expect the pantograph to be in the down position purely for cosmetic purposes but who knows, maybe DTG will have more information on this on one of their streams.

 

The pantograph is as fundamental to the operation of a train on the BML as that stupid light on top of the 700 that never shuts off...
Vital when running under OHLE, irrelevant when running on 3rd rail

 

I don't think GWR is dual voltage...
Except for a short section outside Reading (where the SWR trains come up from Basingstoke etc) there's no third rail on the GWR and the OHLE is all one voltage (to my knowledge)

 

So not adding in features that you would not be able to use anyway is the new definition of rushed content
Do I have a feeling that if such a system was made functional even though you could not use it, that people would be annoyed at the time "wasted" for such a thing instead of doing something to improve what you can use on the route? hmmm

You just need to be patient. You will know soon enough whether the Panto is functional or not. Not that knowing now or having heavy discussions whether it should be functional in the first at this point would do any good anyway

 

Even if the panto is not needed on bml, those stockbased details are important, because after release it wont get any change soon. I think about people might wanna use the train on a electrified route, which has not released now.

So the plan for the devs in my opinion should be:
Reproduce the stock as detailed as possible (no i dont care about working toilets ), and if the train is gonna be used on 3rd rail we use diesel, if the route is electrified we use the panto.

All those different locos, which are routebased end up in a mess.

In other words: are they gonna upgrade the 377/4 on the eastcoastway to the bml standard?