Discussion in 'PC Discussion' started by longo239, Sep 17, 2020.
Hell, I just want it to not be on freakin' DX9 anymore...
Whether we compare TSW or TSW2 to TS, the numbers will suggest that something is wrong with TSW.
How about we revisit this in 8 or 9 years when TSW has as many years of improvement as TS has had to date?
It's not about what's wrong with TSW, it's more about what's missing that would make it better for PC users.
The general consensus from reading all the posts in this thread is that if TSW had the ability to create routes, scenarios and other content that TS allows then it would be incredible and many more people would make the switch.
Until that time, which looking at all the reasons given by DTG, isn't going to be anytime soon, for PC users it's probably going to be lacking.
If TSW had allowed user created content from the beginning, I doubt we would even be having this conversation.
For consoles, that's another story until another company steps in to the arena, which for a very niche area, again probably isn't going to be anytime soon, therefore TSW is as good as it gets if you want to drive trains.
I don't have to do any of that. It looks good on everything. I have one setting and use it for everything.
..they're obviously just in full summer sunshine.. and they're bright yellow.
Correct, but you can achieve a good balance, and I genuinely feel no need to adjust anything in different weather. No one's saying is AS GOOD as TSW.. we're saying it's FAR from the steaming pile that some of you make it out to be.
Bogies seem to move independently of the loco for me. I'm not sure what you mean here.
Looks fine at 6pm in a thunder storm too... same settings.
As someone relatively new to train sims, I found TSW a much better for a new player. Unlike many other people here, I've only had TS for maybe a year and I've only played it for about 4 hours and most of that was only after I had gotten a few dozen hours in TSW, in which I learned the basic mechanics.
I spent most of my first time playing, confused and put off by the dated visuals and UI. Yes, I'm sure there are mods to improve that but truth be told, I simply can't be bothered with all that. If it's not something easy to find on steam it simply isn't worth my time, I got the game to play it not to fiddle about with files and whatnot.
I will probably go back to T. every so often when certain content I desire is on sale (specifically GEML, or content focussed on Manchester as those are what I am familiar with). But it's not going to be something I pump hundreds of hours into or significant amounts of money. TSW, on the other hand, is my 8th most played game on steam with 67.5 hours whilst 2 sits at 20.3 which will only increase significantly over time. It looks nice out of the box, the tutorials tell me what I need to know, the UI and HUD are perfectly sufficient for me.
From my perspective, I think for new players TSW is the better product. I imagine the level of time and sheer investment into TS will more than warrant their continued loyalty, plus the relatively easy to mod platform in terms of content and visuals is worth the effort for many who have invested a lot.
In my mind Train Simulator reminds me of older titles in sim racing, for example, rFactor and Assetto Corsa offer a great moddable platform which many will stick loyal to, even if new sims come onto the market which may be better visually and technically. Older titles if still supported and are readily moddable will often stand the test of time.
Unfortunately, the age of the highly moddable games seems to be behind us for the most part, between licensing, game engine constraints and the constraints of the console platforms the games industry is not as open to modding and third party content as it once was and for that reason I expect Train Simulator may last at least another decade or two with a loyal fanbase supporting it, even if dev support moves on.
Either way, both are great train simulators in my view and having more options on the market is never a bad thing. So whether you're a die-hard TS veteran with a thousand hours or a relative novice like me, we all something to enjoy.
I think this is why a lot of people call TSW a ‘casual console game’ however DTG has never stated which audience TSW is designed and marketed for. Casuals or more serious simulator players.
They constantly clash as casual players will complain something is too hard/complex, and hardcore players complain that stuff isn’t simulated correctly/fully featured and/or functional.
They have never said directly, but the number of players of the console versions and the insistence of parity across all platforms in my opinion clearly states where DTG's main target audience is.
The account book of 2019 of RailSimulator.com(DTG) was published yesterday and shows healthy growth in profit.
Some key numbers:
The book can be accessed here: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06751125/filing-history
Very nice, but what's your point?
Perhaps the issue is that DTG don’t have a specific focus. They wanted a new game to transition PC players from TSxxxx and they wanted access to the console community as that would expand users and revenue. Then they needed the complexity to keep the hardcore Rail fans happy but they needed it also to be accessible to a wide range of players. They wanted to keep the fidelity of a simulation and yet have ‘achievements’ and quests to keep ‘gamers’ happy.
The problem is, as always, it trying to be all things to all people. It’s very hard to achieve.
So when you are in TSW it may look good, but it looks lifeless, because at some point somebody had decided that some part of the performance equation can’t handle a more lively simulated world. Somewhere along the way people are making performance trade offs between things like more AI traffic and the complexity of quests.
Then start adding in real world practicalities. If you have determined the price point that’s acceptable to both PC and Console players then how long the route is (effectively how much it costs to make) is driven by the number of sales you expect adjusted by the profit margin you want to recover. Maybe you know that in the past PC users will pay more for complexity but you can’t include it because that won’t fit the console market pricing.
TSW is a classic case of ‘one size fits all’
TSxxxx made no attempt to give everyone the same experience. 90% of the people who, having found there was an editor, when they opened it up, probably just closed it quietly. And the editor was what unlocked the game to a higher level.
It gives us an objective review of the situation in company and the direction of the train simulator niche market in general. Financially it seems that exporting TSW to consoles was a right thing to do.
remember when Matt said the console versions wouldnt hold back the PC version?
sweet little lies, oh sweet little lies
BR 204, Isle of Wight...
does a ex-DTG studio really count as 3rd party?
BR204 is one DLC, there are promises of more, but at the moment, over the lifetime of the TSW franchise (which according to Wikipedia is July 2018) there has only been one third party DLC.
Skyhook is planning to do Cane Creek, so there!
and Im planning to live to 201, so there!
saying and doing are different
When it happens, great. But for the time being over the past 2 and a bit years, there has been one third party loco produced for any of the TSW games.
What about Skyhook?
The account book of 2019 of RailSimulator.com(DTG) was published yesterday and shows healthy growth in profit
Firstly despite the company name there’s more in there than just the rail games from DTG, and as there’s no breakout in the accounts by game type, or in the notes that accompany it, it’s difficult to tell where that improvement comes from.
Two million in profit doesn’t sound quite as impressive when you adjust for the 1.2 million shown in operating income that’s a UK tax credit for games development. But it is true that they have made progress in the past few years.
Have they actually produced anything yet?
They are on the roadmap, I am sure they will.
Thanks, thought they were also one of the planned producers, but wasn't sure.
Well, it is as lifeless like the old TS is, take i.e. Bernina Line, you pass through middle of Tirano, and not a single person is on the street, empty skylifts in the middle of the winter, no cars outside of few selected roads...
Tbh, I'm yet to find a simulator where the world doesn't feel apocalyptic outside of some bubbles, like stations in train sims. This is a genre wide problem.
Correct... not formally, no. But they have said in live streams that decisions were made based on the limitations set by consoles, so in a way, it was therefore designed with consoles in mind. They didn't implement the importing of images because of console limitations. They didn't implement the ability to type text into the editor instead of manually placing each letter due to console constraints... they designed it with consoles in mind. That doesn't mean they didn't envisage it also as a PC simulation, but the lowest common denominator in this, is the console, and it has been designed with that in mind.
This is not an anti-console post, so please don't treat it as such... it's a fact. I'm not even saying that it is a bad thing... it is what it is.
It is clear from the comments in this thread that those that didn't get on with TS and switched to TSW did so for two main reasons: 1. it looked nicer, and 2. They found TS too complex and difficult as a beginner. It kind of is.
Without prejudice, and based on the feedback in here, TS does not appeal to casual simmers who just want to drive trains, and it does appeal to those who like to get their hands dirty and make things.
They're different pieces of software for different purposes. I genuinely think that is by design, and I genuinely think that's what DTG intended with TSW, and you kow what? It does what they intended very well.
TS is what it is... it is old, but so what? So's World Of Warcraft... and that's still with us, developed and loved by millions. NO one compares it to newer DX12 ray traced AAA titles, so why are we comparing chalk and cheese?
This is bonkers.
Why is someone who just "wants to drive trains" a casual simmer?
TS isn't more complex, it is more obscure when it comes to system introduction (TSW could also do better here), and people are just lazy looking into the manual. The train control is basically the same in TS and TSW, with the exception that TSW has more things you can interact with. Some things are simpler in TS, like multi-engine operation, and banking just work. You don't have to got to each cabin and set the power switches/brake valves properly.
Simulation complexity is higher in TSW for almost every system.
So since July 2018... your list is comprised of 1? I think you're making my point for me.
I did say "without prejudice" as part of my post. It's for want of a better term to describe them, but in reality, they don't want the added complexity of adding DLC... copying files over (sometimes fairly complex), making routes etc... they just want to drive trains. If you can think of a better moniker, knock yourself out.
That depends on what content is available. If I can't do what I can in TS, then no I won't... i'll just mourn its passing, and move on to something else. If I liked TSW I'd use it now. I have it in my Steam library. Not touched it for 6 months now. It woudl have to change beyond all recognition to make me switch.
Does anyone know why there's so little 3rd party content for TSW? What's the barrier from stopping it from happening? Is it some kind of licensing issue? It baffles me that after two and a half years, there's hardly any. What's the actual reason? Does anyone know?
Or, more usefully, compare TSW now, to how TS was after 2 and half years.
That was obviously never going to happen unless you implement features that are PC specific to a PC version.
You don't call someone who flies high fidelity flight simulators a "casual flight simmer", just because he doesn't create missions, or custom skins. Or isn't interested in mods
"Casual" generaly implies someone who isn't interested in the topic, Like, I wouldn't call someone who drivers with all safety system enabled, and computes the maximum allowable speed based on the train weight and brake % a casual, even though he driving trains is all he does in the game.(I'm 100% there people like these in this comunity).
There is no need to use an adjective. TSW might be more attractive for people for like to drive, TS is definitely for people who also like to create. Neither of those are casuals.
So like I said.. suggest another term I can use. There's clearly a distinction between the two types of user... I need an adjective to identify them in a conversation.
So there is a distinction to be made. Adjective please
Creators, non-creators, that's all you need.
I'm going to take a punt and say all the third party devs are used to the old engine and it is probably simpler overall to use. To go to a whole new game engine means they kind of have to re-learn a lot of the process. At least that was my experience in being part of the Automobilista 2 beta program, which involved a fairly small dev team having to learn a whole new engine, it seems logical that it would be a similar situation here. Speculation on my part but it makes sense to me.
yeah, but given two and a half years, would you invest some time in learning if there was profit to be made?
DTG is in a bit of a bureaucratic tie with Epic Games over the ability to export a modified version of the Unreal Editor to the general public. There are also supposed concerns over leaking intellectual property with said piece of software. That is why, thus far, DTG has kept all demonstrations and information about the e-word close to their chest and are very selective about whom they will send the editor to use. Rivet Games was the first on-board because of their close relationship with DTG. Ultimately, these 'third-party' developers are much closer to second-party, in my opinion.
The editor exists, but they can not legally release it according to Epic Games. The only way to mod the game is by using UE4 asset extractors and hex-editors. Thus, the lack of user-created content.
So then TSW will never, ever see the same level of content development as TS.
A bit glib... but kind of.. yeah... there you go. I'll be sticking with TS then.
I don't know, my guess would be;
1. Third parties waited to see if TSW would gain enough popularity (and thus would generate enough sales) before making any investments.
2. Third parties aren't familiar with the new editing tools yet. (Which may also be why many third parties are still developing stuff for Train Simulator, they got the people with the skills for it)
I think it makes perfect sense for Rivet Games to experiment with a little locomotive DLC first, which is probably small enough just to test the waters and familiarize themselves with some tools. Their next project is a short 8-mile route with a train sharing quite some similarities with something already developed by DTG. IMO that's just to familiarize themselves with the tools, before moving on their next project, which is a full route DLC with unique rolling stock.
I think it makes perfect sense there's a bit of a delay in third party content. Don't forget that DTG probably took their time to develop and familiarize themselves with the tools prior to TSW release. Third parties need to do that after the release (see point 2), or even after their decision that developing something for TSW is worth the investment (see point 1).
Revisit in 8 or 9 years?... we'll be on TSW5 by then at least
‘I think it makes perfect sense there's a bit of a delay in third party content. Don't forget that DTG probably took their time to develop and familiarize themselves with the tools prior to TSW release.‘
I think you underestimate the abilities of the third party developers. If they are in the Rail Simulation business they’ll learn the tools quickly. The engine is hardly unknown to the gaming community. It was released in its first form in 1998.
Note as well on the release of the new MSFS just about every third party flight simulator developer has run off to develop content and it is already appearing weeks after the release. Yes, it had Microsoft behind the product but if sales are there third parties will quickly transition.
This is hardly ‘a bit of a delay’. The fact that there aren’t third party developers at this point (other than Rivet who have connections to DTG) means either (or both of) DTG aren’t encouraging third party content or the sales aren’t there.
For many third party developers producing Rail Simulation is their living. The suggestion that they’ve been familiarizing themselves with the tools since 2017 doesn’t make any sense.
Two and a half years is a "bit of a delay"?
In reality, it's surely more than 2.5 years, maybe even 4 years. It was no secret a couple of years before TSW Heavy Haul first released, that DTG were working on the new sim. And I'd be really surprised if the well known 3rd party developers close to DTG, weren't aware that it was UE4 that would be used. i.e. they could some extent prepare to get going if they were so inclined.
Which again does make one wonder if DTG would prefer to keep content development in-house. Of course this is purely personal conjecture - I may be wide of the mark.
Well.. when people describe years as a "bit of a delay" you know you're up against people who will never, ever acknowledge the elephant in the room.
This debate is good, don't wreck it now by criticising those who think differently.
MSFS is still a continuation of FSX, and the api is still simconnect. There are already tools that allows conversion for basic planes from FSX to MSFS.
A better comparison would be FSX/P3D to XPlane, how long did it take to for the big scenery and aircraft creators like ORBX or PMDG to even try to move to a different platform?
Also, lets not forget that FSX development is dead, and in p3d you pay $60 (if you cheat on licensing) for each major engine update + the occasional rebuy of several addons + the investment required to make sim look half-good. Compared to that TS is a thriving, well supported platform.
For devs, moving to another platform is difficult, especially in a niche segment. If you're a 3rd party developer, that is developing for TS for some time, then you know the ins-and-outs of the engine and it's game system (i.e. how the dispatcher works, how the signalling works), you know what works and what doesn't, how to work around limitations, you have your assets library build up, you have rolling stock build up, you have your loco and signaling scripts build up. The platform is stable, there are no new big features being introduced, and no breaking changes are to be expected. The only thing you're spending time right now is producing stuff that brings revenue. You have your production pipeline narrowed down. Based on your experience you can do correct estimets, thus you can do more precise estime how much $$$ you have to spent on a product, and how much $$$ you will get back. You're as efficient, as you ever be.
Moving to TSW means that you most likely have to dump all the stuff you already have, be it assets, or engine knowledge. Why would you do that while TS is still profitable?
Wat? That means that for me, a SW dev, I should be proficient with every technology, becaue it is known to the broad SW dev community?
To get experience with someting, you need to work with it for extended time. Be it TS, be it unreal engine (current version, not the 1.0), or be it simmugraph.
‘Why would you do that while TS is still profitable?‘
Back catalogues are usually profitable but how much new TSxxxx stuff has there been. Take Armstrong Powerhouse for example. How much new stuff have they released in the past two years? How do you know that New content for the legacy platform is still profitable?
On P3D one of the reasons that there was delay in vendors moving to the platform was the uncertainty over the licensing. It was never, and is not now, meant to be a platform for non-professional users. But once everyone signed up as a student and no one cared (including DTG who should have been concerned as they with FSX purchase were meant to be the ‘home’ solution) and no one got sued then the vendors got interested.
On steam, just about 50new dlcs in 2020 so far
I don't known. But based on the usual trend of decreasing development cost, which happens as the platform matures, and more experience is accumulated in the team, the relatively stable playerbase, non-changing pricing model and relative small inflation the last few years it is safe to assume that the market hasn't changed much in the TS world.
I mean, isn't this whole debate about thinks noone outside of DTG knows?
And I'm not talking about FSX to P3D transition, I'm talking about P3D to XPlane. There were no licensing issues, the platform was quite alive, yet developers didn't move, why?
Separate names with a comma.