Discussion in 'Dovetail Live Article Discussion' started by TrainSim-James, Feb 20, 2020.
A statement from DTG would be appropriate here.
Wow, that's pretty shoddy, although those images really say "unfinished" to me. Hopefully, they just ran out of time before the pre-determined release date and have temporarily closed off those zones until they have a chance to put everything straight and expand the playable area with the inevitable bug fix update
If not, this very much feels like a new low.
And still "mostly positive" reviews on Steam... Looks like DTG needs to poison their customers' cats'n dogs so people finally treat them the way they deserve.
I only buy UK routes but this looked interesting because of the freight activity we don't see here any more. If these areas really aren't accessible then I won't be buying it I'm afraid. The free roam aspect of the harbour area was the main selling point for me, tripping wagons to industries along the line and in the industrial area. If that isn't happening, forget it.
I just got a refund from steam
I think that'll change. Many of the positive reviewers have only played the game for a brief moment and have yet to realise the amount of track that is inaccessible. The other thing to keep in mind is that only people who have bought the DLC will have been able to review it, so it doesn't reflect the numbers of people who haven't bought it based on what they have read here and elsewhere about DTG's dishonesty.
Still got the same bloody sound issues, cutting out flange and track noise, who the hell is testing these products?
Perhaps in future before releasing a route a map could be published which shows the track we can actually use. The boundary of the "represented area" on the in game map would be helpful too. Very annoying to be free roaming around Lackenby steel works to suddenly get booted back to the menu. If tracks are shown on the map, we should be able to access them. I love the Tees Valley but still remember the disappointment of realising most of the interesting bits are off limits.
They made that statement already I'd say, over and over again. "Takes too long to make."
Maybe DTG should have listened to their own advise:
That's an insult to hamsters!
Fortunately, I read about the inaccessible tracks in various forums and applied for a refund right away before I played extensively.
I think it's a shame that DTG is wasting a lot of trust with it. It could have been communicated differently and the disappointment would not be so great.
Yeah - this is the final nail in the coffin for me, for this route. I was hoping that they had built-out all of this area, in detail, and properly. I am struggling to understand what has happened here, but I suspect that:
- when the route was conceived that they intended to build out this area, and wrote the marketing blurb in the concept meeting
- at some point they realised that it would take a bit of work to do it properly
- they then just slap-dashed some stock buildings over the trackwork so that the area didn't look unfinished from a distance
- they didn't bother to seal off the boundaries
- they didn't test anything much, except maybe just before the Dev Stream when they realised that they needed to find something that might work live on YouTube
- they forgot to change the marketing blurb to reflect what they then decided to release
This is the worst construction that I have seen since the horrific build-outs on NEC, which are just above one of the principal shunting yards, and within sight of the free-camera.
We have a TV show in the UK called something like "Great Model Railway Challenge". This OSD route is a bit like the ones that the most hubristic teams in the TV show tell you will be fantastic.... but when placed under time pressure to complete the layout... the final product is one that has unpainted woodwork, with no working trains, and ends up as a mess of glue, screws and exposed wiring.
If it is not finished, then you don't have to release it until it is finished. They knew that it was nowhere near finished before they announced the arrival of the new DLC. They bound themselves into a public release date knowing full well that they had no time to "finish" the DLC, but even then - if the release date was a mistake, they could have revised the date and delayed.
I delved into this route yesterday and thought I'd have a go at the free roam... Shocking that you get kicked out trying to explore.. I've looked at the live stream again and as they look at that area of the map Matt says "in this area you can basically drive wherever you want" errm no you can't.... Very disappointed..
I think this is the exact problem. They could have said, "those are the area accessible, those are not". In this case, each one could decide if the accessible areas are worth the money or not and any complaint would have been unfounded.
But they have been vague and/or misleading about which areas of the yard are accessible, in the DLC details and during the pre-release stream. Moreover, the manual clearly states that those areas are player accessible. I'm not sure from a law point of view, as I'm not a lawyer, but can we talk about a scam here?
At least Mr (dickie) Turpin wore a mask..
False promises, sub-standard dlc, radio silence from dtg.. Same old, same old.
And onwards to the next dlc, rinse and repeat.
How anyone can give dtg a penny of their hard earned cash is beyond me.
And for them to do a live stream knowing full well the limitations of the route in an attempt to deceive is disgusting, shame on you.
Well, in the UK there is over-arching legislation called the Consumer Protection Act, but the most likely legislative instrument that applies directly here is the CPUTR 2008 - Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. CPUTR makes it illegal to market a product in a way that influences a reasonable person to make a purchasing decision if:
- it is misleading (untruthful)
- it is misleading through ommission (they didn't tell you something that they really should have told you)
The CPUTR Reg 5 tests are (more explicitly):
(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4)* or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and
(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.
*And para (4) matters include:
(a)the existence or nature of the product;
(b)the main characteristics of the product (as defined in paragraph 5**);
**And the "main characteristics" include (for example):
(b)benefits of the product;
(e)composition of the product;
(f)accessories of the product;
(g)after-sale customer assistance concerning the product;
(h)the handling of complaints about the product;
(l)fitness for purpose of the product;
(m)usage of the product;
(n)quantity of the product;
(o)specification of the product;
(q)results to be expected from use of the product; and
(r)results and material features of tests or checks carried out on the product.
Basically, in the UK, if you think that something is likely to be against the law then it usually is, and if it isn't against the law today, then it soon will be.... ;-)
NB: The Reg 5 tests have to both be met. So - if, as an average consumer, you reasonably believed the product would be as buggy as hell with vast amounts of broken stuff in it, then no law has been broken - and this could be the case if the software was marketed as "an incomplete early release beta, for a fee".... etc. But.... TSW is not marketed as a beta release test software.....
And.... since the product is marketed directly on Steam and PlayStation Store - to a wide range of potentially less-informed consumers (more vulnerable...but more "average"....than the average Forum reader), then the sort of malarkey you get with TSW starts to look really bad....
I'm willing to give them the benefit of doubt on this one. There seem to be several instances of explicitly claiming you can use all that track, including the map. Maybe it's a mistake...
Even if you could, what would that help if there were ramdom buildings placed on the track hap-harzardly? These areas are definitely not meant to be used, ever.
We've seen that the inaccessible areas don't have finished scenery, so it's not a case of the map boundaries just being in the wrong place. The scenery isn't complete and the areas are inaccessible, yet DTG give the impression all that track has finished scenery and is accessable to players. It's not an accident.
I'm pretty sure it was advertised as one of the main selling points too!
And as per usual dtg retreat to their bunker when the bullets start flying, where is the statement or just a couple of sentences to address / explain the paying customers concerns?
And that marketing blurb got past proof reading and actually into the public domain then what does that say?
They're either blatantly lying or the marketing department is totally inept.
A shorter response for you:
I don't think I would call the OSD DLC "a scam". But you could, I think, quite easily build a case for Trading Standards covering the Chatham area to investigate, concerning the "fairness" of the marketing. And that includes the DTG website, the Forums, the manual, the blurb on Steam Store, PlayStation Store and MS Store, as well as the DevStream videos on YouTube. I am not suggesting that such a complaint be made, but I would like DTG to start asking themselves some questions, like:
"This stuff we are writing down - is it actually true...can we really get away with this sort of stuff for much longer...?"
"Is the stuff we are saying reasonably fair ... if we mention X, Y and Z, then that might put people off... but should we really keep quiet about it... is that really fair to some of our consumers... that might be eight years old...?"
"Do we really know what we are doing.... should we get some help from the local schools - maybe have a few sixteen year-olds do a week of work experience... and they can test our products and tell us what they think... and we can bung them a PlayStation and a T-shirt.......?"
"Would it be a good idea to test the next product before we release it for sale....?"
"What risks shall we take this year.....?"
They probably can see how players used previous routes, and management thought that they could pull a fast one thinking not many people would actually care.
That backfired badly.
DTG can just about get away with things like recycled sounds or physics issues, as whether they are bad or good is a subjective issue. The map showing trackage accessible to the player which isn't actually accessible is an objective issue, so no one can really argue in DTG's defense. People also take it as an insult when they feel that someone is being dishonest in an attempt to sell them a product.
Overall, DTG have really done themselves some damage on this one.
You enjoy typing don't you.
Release a quick 20-30 mile route with the bare minimum rolling stock you can get away with (use recycled trains and sounds if possible) sell enough to cover costs and wages for the next couple of months, move on to the next dlc.
Apart from the trains looking good what else?
£25 for a route with a couple of trains and 5 scenarios with no dynamic weather or events, then service mode where it's just A to B where you can change the weather, but avoid rain or around midday because it looks quite frankly awful.
£11.99 for loco dlc with 3 scenarios with the same limitations as above.
I agree, and for me it is very unpleasant to see this unfold. Especially since I made the mistake of being very encouraged and optimistic by what I had initially seen. The question going forward, for me, is going to be - can they (DTG) see the damage...? Do they "get it....".....?
I started out, on the "Oh Canada" thread, with a simple challenge - would the DLC be tested....? And I only did that..... because... as ridiculous as this sounds.... because the DB BR 155 still cuts out all sound in RSN tunnels. It was never tested, and it was never fixed.
My point here is that this isn't just a "fleck of dust" in the pan (as opposed to a flash...) - this isn't some temporary gripe with the OSD route - this is something that people will remember for a long time.
In a legal sense, they may well have blood on their hands now. It will be interesting to see if somebody files a lawsuit, and how all the refunds will affect the future development of TSW. It certainly doesn't put them in an easier position when it comes to funding the development of the next add-on. This looks a lot like a vicious circle to me. And perhaps the beginning of the end for DTG/TSW.
Lexis Nexis Legislative Database: Ctrl+C
Dovetail Forum: Ctrl+V
Backspace, down arrow, end, backspace
Left mouse click on "Post"
I can also type very fast. But not as fast as my colleague that wrote the adverts for Auto Trader during my student night-shift job many years ago - she could do a staggering 140 words per minute (no lie...she'd break keyboards through wear and tear...LOL....).
Wow. I feel so inadequate after hearing that.
I took a test once for a data entry job and my typing speed was so low, they told me it didn't even register
a number value worth submitting lol!!
AND I STILL GOT THE JOB LOL!!!
Also, they say when you type that fast for a living you eventually develop some "TYPE" of arthritis in the
bones in your hands. get it,..... "type"
OK, that was , kindava joke.
I need Sleep
What is bothersome though is in the manual, the map has "Represnted Railway (Not Player Accessible)," but none of the yards are listed as such.
I remember when this route was announced and people complained about the length, Matt said something along the lines that developing the Hamilton yard was half the dev time.
I don't know if we can blame Matt and anyone below him as much as people above him though. I can believe it would be better if it was given more man hours. It sparks the whole "We want DLC frequently and that is good" conversation where there is no clear winning solution.
Regardless, after looking at the manual, its false and misleading. I can't say they will do much to fix it though.
I’m sure DTG has their reasons, or should I say excuses, for releasing a unfinished route with false/misleading advertising.
Though the best way for them to save their skins and what little reputation they have left, is to provide a statement on here as to why a route like this, in the condition it has been released in, has been sold.
I assume this is the higher ups/management decision, and do not give a damn about route quality or if it is complete or not. As long as the money keeps on rolling in...
It seems DTG have gone in to full hiding mode. Not one response from anyone at DTG on these forums.
I believe most of the higher ups are ex EA people?
If that's the case it explains a lot.
DTG-silence™ - this is what they can do best.
Although I am happy that a Canadian route has finally been added to TSW, I am not happy with some of it's quality gone into the route. I played some last night trying to put all the negativity that I had read on the forums. For the most part the route itself looks okay somethings I have noticed.
Went through the training runs and the last one loading the ethanol is bugged, I was able to finish it but took a bit to get to complete what was asked. The braking physic's on the loco's I have found to be way to easy there's no way in minimum that it could stop that fast.
Walking around Hamilton's massive yard at least the area's that are accessible I see sloppy work such as the placement of traffic lights at intersections. In one case I saw one traffic light at a intersection for one direction only where are the of three. Another intersection had 4 traffic lights they are definitely not the correct ones.
I really hope that they open up the ares of the yard that are closed off to us it is a real shame they go to all the trouble of making the yards and close it off to us.
I intend to play some again hoping that I do not find too much more wrong, I am somewhat disappointed in the quality of the first Canadian route
Thanks all for the feedback on the Oakville.
It's clear that the map is creating some confusion. We are looking into this and will update following the weekend.
Very well. That's just weird then. They released the wrong build?! The manual and product description must have been produced early on then, and the route cut down at a later date, or something?
I feel bad for the DTG folks who have no say in what gets made but keep finding themselves in the role of the messenger who keeps getting their heads ripped off. One of them, in response to a complaint of mine, said that whole team believes wholeheartedly in what they do... but come on. You can't be that scummy, not voluntarily. Sounded a bit like the kidnapper with the pumpgun was standing right next to him when he said that.
I imagine they're all busy, desperately trying to get those industrial zones finished off for an impending update!
Not sure confusion is the right word, but thanks for letting us know that you're aware of these discussions. Hopefully it will be the industries and playable zones which are amended, and not the map in the user guide.
Well I woke up this morning and was actually looking forward to buying this route. After the discussion we have had here since the announcement of the route I had plenty of time to mull over my thoughts and expectations and decided yesterday I would purchase this route on payday today and give it a fair shot. Boy am I glad I checked on the forums first before opening my wallet ..
What happened here? What is this? I wanted the pessimism to be squashed with a route that exceeded all expectations but that is clearly not what was delivered. This is disappointing to say the very least and I am glad so many here have had their hard earned money returned. DTG, please sort yourselves as this is not the way to satisfy your customer base. This is not what we want.
It kind of hurt to watch that video from the early days of TSW development. The passion exuded by those interviewed was palpable and I remember how utterly excited I was for this product and have been loyal ever since. This is NOT how you maintain loyalty. Let's see who will be getting my money instead today ...
I think they might have ran out of time when building the harbor area. I think the original plan was to include all of it. They probably wrote the description and made the manual prior to scenery. My biggest gripe with this DLC is the freight car brakes.
It will be interesting to see just what the confusion is?
Seems black and white with no shaded grey to me.
I am tempted to do a "Lost In Translation" thread... although it would be in danger of being a bit controversial... A sort of Bushism/Trumplexicon type thread, so...
"It's clear that the map is creating some confusion" = ""It's now clear that we need to provide clarification"
"There's a problem with the scheduler" = "There's a problem with the way we set-up the initial states in the scenario"
and... of course.......>>>>> "countless" = "three"
More generally - I would point out that it's not just the map that is an issue. It's the whole package, including the DevStream, websites, store site descriptions - everything. There isn't some sort of communal hallucination going on here... You can't suddenly say
"You can access all of these areas" = "You can't access most of these areas"
Running out of the time is a poor excuse, inexcusable in fact.
Whose fault is it if time ran out? But we are still expected to pay £25 for it.
Is there any QA at all or are the poor buggers who pay full price at release the testers?
No word about the locked areas in the stream at around 18 minutes and 50 seconds... but "it's going to keep you busy".
Separate names with a comma.