Why Does Dtg Intentionally Delay Updates/fixes/patches?

Some updates and/or fixes have been completed for months, sitting around ready, waiting to be released, yet DTG refuses to release them until they actively work on a route which fits the same ‘category’ of which the finished updates match. Such as country, for example.

What does this actually achieve, apart from creating a backlog of updates which are ready to be released? If I remember correctly, the current backlog was around 6-12 months before they get back to ‘normal speed’.

Furthermore, whilst these updates have been sitting around doing nothing, they could’ve further improved and/or added more features to this specific update.

A good example is the ECW PIS feature. This has been ready for around 4-5 months now. Though it won’t have the latest features, such as being to display station calling points off the TSW physical map. Why? Because at the time of work, the PIS wasn’t that advanced. In all that time it has been sitting around doing nothing, newer and better features could’ve been added to it. Failing that we could’ve just had it by now, months ago.

Why not just release updates, providing they are an acceptable size, when they are ready? Or bundle it with a different counties update. What is the fascination with only releasing updates if it matches x, y and z category?

 

I think there are several reasons for it and I think one of them is being a limit as to how often they publish updates and the hassle of finding the "right slot" for consoles and that having to go through their checks etc. However I also don't like the fact we have been waiting for months on updates set to go.

 

I don’t mind waiting a couple of weeks after it’s been completed, however 5-4 months is totally unacceptable.

In a live stream there was a developer showing the functional PIS in ECW. No doubt it’s been released internally for ages now.

 

If you look carefully, you can see it working in ECW, in this video.

 

There might be a specific flat rate admin cost associated with each bundle of fixes, so more patches mean more individual fees.

But sometimes platform-controllers (Playstation and Microsoft) can also have very very stiff penalties associated with the second and third patch to any software on their platforms, to disincentivise shoddy bug-ridden software from appearing on their platform at first launch.

It is believed that Microsoft, for example, has been known to charge developers $40,000 for the second and each subsequent patch (after allowing a day one patch and a further free patch).

So - the moral to the story is, to follow this process:

1. Make the game.
2. Test the game (the original coder developer).
3. Test the game again (inside the project's team).
4. Get someone else to test the game (do a beta test)
5. Test the game again, putting it through a rigorous QA process.
6. Release the game.
7. Have no need to issue a patch, and save yourself the costs associated with it, and the reputational damage.
8. Earn youself a reputation for making clean bug-free games at launch, and maximise the revenue from the full undiscounted launch price.

QA is really a developer's friend.

 

synthetic.angel Unfortunately, as we know, DTG sticks by their release dates, regardless of the current state of condition of the DLC. Even if there are so really bad scenery flaws - see SEHS.

So we’re stuck in a loophole of DLC release of questionable quality, to then have to wait months for a patch/update release.

 

It's not all as bad as it sounds though, they said for ages that LIRR and RT were done when in fact they hadn't even gone through QA. Sometimes the devs say things are done just because it is off their desk but there are other hurdles to clear. In this week's roadmap stream Adam said that there had been some bits that had come back to be fixed from QA, so the declaration that they were done was premature.

I think the 6-12 month backlog you mention is actually the queue for QA, it seems they prioritise new locos and routes over fixes to the preserved collection instead of working on a FIFO basis where the order it arrives at QA is the order it is dealt with. Whilst this makes sense from a revenue perspective there will be items that just end up getting shuffled to the back of the queue all the time.

It would be interesting to know when the ECW PIS finally cleared QA with all the corrections finally signed off. I suspect that wasn't 4-5 months ago, if it was then I would agree it isn't acceptable. They will presumably be releasing with the 313.

Another possbility of course is that the 313 should have come out a while ago and was itself delayed in that case they should have just cut the cord and released the new PIS by itself.

If they had spent the time fiddling with it and adding new things it would again be back in the QA queue so that wouldn't really help matters.

 

The impression that I get from DTG is that it is primarily a Marketing company, that happens to have a side-line in software development (that happens to include train stuff and fish stuff) that it can use as a platform for its marketing activities (now known as Communitying activities).

So - I think that threads like this one (with the title that you used) are really important, because hopefully some of the Communitying senior management will see it, wonder what it is all about, and ask the question you have posed in a board meeting. And if the Finance guys are at the same meeting, and they hear whispers that doing QA can actually improve revenues (and reduce those horrible-looking "patch charges") .... you know, if that conversation is allowed to happen... then maybe they will agree that doing some QA would be a good idea in future, and maybe they will write down what they've agreed, and refer to it later on, as part of their "strategy".

Once that happens, they can start planning their projects, to include QA. And then the question will arise:

"What is that very very long bar on the Gantt chart, that is delaying the release of product 154.... this one here, in blue, the one marked "QA", why can't we just get rid of it, and just release product 154 now..... and get the readies rolling in.... ?"

And the answer will be:

"We agreed that we can make even more money, by doing this "QA" thingyamabob." And the Finance guys (hopefully they'd be the same Finance guys from earlier) would say:

"Yes, that's right - in simple terms, QA = more money. I know, it sounds ridiculous to delay things by doing this QA thingy, but seriously - I have heard others mention this - and it's the "in thing" in the world of....what is it we are doing... ah yes... software development.... the software developer people that are most successful really go crazy for this QA thing.... and they make lots of money by doing it. Yes, QA =more money. We should do more of this QA stuff."

---------

On a more serious note.... now is the time to get it right, with Rush Hour. DTG have pocketed a few £million in profit, and they can use the head-room that this facilitates to pause the product pipeline for, say, three months (and not release anything for a while) and put in a decent QA process. Then, once it's in the pipeline for all future releases, the only difference the Finance guys will notice is the increased revenue.

And then, the dreaded broken DLC Mobius Loop ends, and everyone will be happy ever after.

 

Pretty sure Microsoft don't charge such crazy fees anymore, if any. That happened in the Xbox 360 days and was scrapped in 2013. Just wouldn't be feasible with today's landscape of games being supported years after launch.

 

I also think that when releasing the ECW PIS update alongside the Class 313, I have a feeling it’ll be used in the upcoming Class 313 trailer. Almost as if the PIS is part of an exclusive feature for the 313.

If true, then delaying an update to then intentionally use it within advertising, to maximum another DLC sale, isn’t cool. Good for marketing, not for its players.

 

It was even on the roadmap and it was said MULTIPLE times that DTG had an update jam caused by the Preserved Collection. DTG did not plan a Preserved Collection when developing the TSW 2, that came later and therefore DTG had an update jam at the beginning of 2021. The payware DLC's have significantly more priority than updates. And besides, you have to download every route anew with every update. I don't think that some of them would agree with a 30-40 (or more) GB update. It has also been communicated very often that they do not want the players to download extremely large updates that take several hours. Also lot of DLC was also released in early 2021. SEHS, class 465, Arosa Line, BR101, soon to be Hamburg Lübeck. This is also a factor that caused the update jam.

Of course, not all people are always on the live streams or read the roadmap, but the update traffic jam has been communicated for a very long time and I am very surprised that so few people still know.

Just wait ... On Tuesday the Rapid Transit Update will finally come, then LIRR. Maybe we'll see East Coastway on Tuesday, nobody knows.

 

What they said is they think RT will release before HHL, but they also said it was not 100% sure. All that leads to think that RT will release next tuesday as you said, but they did not "promise" to do it.

 

I feel like QA and the release team should start prioritizing bug fixes and release them when ready instead of prioritizing new content that not everyone will buy. Waiting to release things or test them only causes a backlog meaning fixes will take longer to release. Waiting 3 months for a bug fixes that was already done is unacceptable and this could've all been avoided if dtg had probably tested the products prior to launch instead of releasing as is and fixing it 7 months later.

I honestly don't see what is gained on intentionally delaying patches that customers who have paid for that content in some way have been waiting months for

 

Microsoft stopped doing that in 2013 though and they don't charge any fees for bug fixes so that is definitely not the problem

 

An excellent idea, if a "clean, bug-free game at launch" didn't reside on the same ontological plane as unicorns and Father Christmas.

 

Right. A business should prioritize non-revenue items over revenue items.

 

I don't think we'll see the ECW update on Tuesday, as the 313 I'd guess is still a few weeks away. You also have to remember the QA team is not just doing TSW stuff, they're also doing the Fishing stuff and TS1 stuff.

 

Just to add here. In my view the reason they may be holding it back for the 313 may be to do with the train lengths. As we know the PIS informs us of how many carriages the train has and in order for it to be accurate the boards would need to read formed of 3 carriages. If they released before the 313 then they would have to go back and correct the text from 4 to 3 carriages and that is yet another update.

 

Pretty sure all the information on the PIS is dynamic and read from the timetable, so too, I imagine, is the train length.

 

Never imagine anything my friend. This is DTG we are talking about.

 

As far as I understand it, it is a more practical issue. For the 313 they need to publish an update for ECW anyway, so PIS can be included at no additional download costs. If they would release PIS separately, there would be to updates for ECW in a relative short time frame.

I am definitely not 100% convinced by the update policies, but there are users with a rather expensive internet connections who need to pay for each Gb downloaded and they may have a different opinion that we have. Releasing is definitely not free, it can be quite expensive. Hopefully there is some progress in making releases cheaper, faster and smaller. From personal experience, I know it may take a lot of time to improve release schedules.

 

I think they do testing, on us "Cuz if you don`t like it, go play TRAINZ, or stay with TS1" type-of-mentality.

I work in industry, and I feel sometimes that I really want to make the best for me, for people in general (regardless if they buy the thing day 1 or third hand just to crash/destroy/make fun of. If it considers what I/we built, it is a big win. And to be able every day to do your passion and get money out of it... wow... is great. But...

But those who pay salaries, don`t care about perfect. We are just codes on a platform or just an excel. They want good enough. And TSW is good enough, in fact, better in some aspects than TS1 or Trainz. I just rode the TGV as a passenger in the TSW and I was surprised how realistic it is and more beautiful (graphics are better loaded when looking side-ways). The only trick that is missing from a TGV experience is the clouds. They pass away much, much faster in real life (due to speed).

So yeah a company will not invest more than they really, absolutely need to, in order to deliver what users want. (CyberPunk supposed to be better than GTA IV so yeah... that is why people hated it...

But I don`t know how bugs work. How come I drive a Scenario (1 out of 5) and it has a bug... Never mind the timetable.

 

I don't see any inconsistency there. The reprogramming was complete; testing was yet to be done.

 

Yeah, it's funny. I have been really very lucky, ontologically speaking....! Apparently my PS4 has x227 (two hundred and twenty seven) games on it. One is TSW, and another is TSW 2, and another is Fallout 76 - and all three have been fairly buggy.

But the other x224 have all been unicorns. Every single last one of them. I have not experienced a single bug (that I can remember, anyway) in 98.7% of the games.

Lucky, eh? There must be something that the developers of the z224 games are doing that the developers of the x3 are not doing. Have you any idea what that might be?

 

Seriously? Do you own RDR2? Witcher III?? Mass Effect? Any Assassin's Creed title? Any Bethesdas besides Fallout 4? Every one of them launched with bugs, often major bugs, which were smoothed out in later patches. I know, I have them all. The only difference is that a studio the size of Rockstar can get a bug patched and the patch released within weeks rather than months.

 

Because it isn't "done" if it can bounce back for fixes.

 

If the bug fixes came out, some people who may not have wanted to buy the route like lirr because of it's immersion breaking bugs may actually buy it because the bugs are fixed. Bug fixes can make a company revenue when product is fixed and works properly. It's a no brainer

 

When Adam's team got to msb, most of the bug fixes were fixed in a couple of weeks. The issue is that it hasn't gone through QA yet so Rockstar being bigger than dtg doesn't mean anything.

 

....so the fact thar R*'s QA department numbers in the hundreds makes no difference in processing time?

 

If dtg's qa team focused on major bug fixes like the MSB update, it probably wouldn't take long to process and release

 

Yes - seriously. 98.7% of my PS4 titles do not have bugs. And it is a similar rate for my Steam collection for PC...and funnily enough... the three relatively buggy games on my PC are TS2012, TSW and TSW 2.....

Not only that, but broadly speaking, this has been my experience for about 35 years. In the early days, developers had to meticulously QA their software... otherwise they would be in a position were they had to send you a patch on floppy disk, at their extreme expense (although the word "patch" is actually derived from magnetic tape technology.....). So they ensured they did it right first time, nearly all of the time.

And yes, I own and fully played through RDR2 (over 80% achievements...), including all of the online parts... athough I bought it two years after it released. And I specifically remember telling my other half how remarkable it was - almost flawless, including the online bits..... the only bug in about 100 hours of play was a horse that spawned a few feet in the air - once. (NB: I know that it launched with bugs aplenty, but evidently they decided to fix them - all of them). And yes Rockstar is a massively bigger/richer studio than DTG. But then again - RDR2 and GTA V are massively more complex than TS2012 and TSW. And they have massively complex online environments. (And this is why DTG should not touch multi-player, or any online features - because it is a completely different level of "difficult to do").

I didn't buy Fallout 76 when it released because of the (thousands of) bugs. It was originally on sale for £76, and some people bought versions that cost $200. I picked it up for £8, and the 1000 page hard-backed strategy guide was £2 (including postage, down from £40 not including postage). So in my case, Bethesda missed out on over 90% of the price that I was originally prepared to pay, had Fallout 76 worked on release.

That is my point. QA = More Money.

QA = More Money.

QA = More Money.

QA = More Money.

QA = More Money.

TS2012 and TSW are simple, by comparison. And I mean simple - really really basic, by comparison. You can make more complex stuff in Dreams (which has a sort of user editable equivalent to SimuGraph).

It doesn't take much to do QA on TSW..... in fact.... all you have to do get the ball rolling (apparently) is to release the game (in whatever state it is in), then do a launch stream on RailfanTV, and start making notes on all the bugs as you broadcast live on the internet......

Sometimes I wish the production team and marketing team for TSW just pretended that the game had been released, and pretended that RailFanTV was live on the internet with a "launch special" (and that would include people pretending to respond in live chat), just so that they could get that first-look QA test done.... to pick up the bugs that become apparent in the first ten minutes of play.

 

And there's your answer. You didn't own it at launch. I did, and it was full of bugs. The same I suspect is true of the other 98.7% of your PS4 games: you bought them well after launch and after they had been patched. At launch: buggy. After 100s of thousands of users effectively beta-test it for weeks: bugs patched.

 

And Rockstar's electric bill is bigger than DTG's gross revenues, and R* has more people in its catering department than DTG have on payroll. RDR2 cost as much to make as the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy.

 

Re RDR2 being bug-free after two years- yep - that's why I said I bought it after two years.....? That's why I bought Fallout 76 after a year. That's why Rockstar and Bethesda got less of my money.

QA = More Money

But.... RDR2 is a truly massive game, constantly updated with new content (and brand-new online content was part of my experience). And I absolutely fully played it through (other than finding the hundreds of collectibles.....). And it really was flawless - and I can assure you that I notice the very tiniest of tiny bugs. And there weren't any, other than the one floaty horse (and that was an online player's horse). That's pretty good terrain/boundary management combined with online server management. Oh - hang on - I also noticed that one plant had rendered as a 2D structure, so from some angles you could see that it was a just a 2D textured object from some angles - and this was in a very remote area - and it was just this one plant. So - utterly outstanding build quality.

Oakville DLC has been out for a while now for TSW - why don't you go have a look at it....? This is a DLC with extremely limited scope. Most of it is a straight line. Go and see if you get a bug-free experience from Oakville. I will give you a tip - when shunting around, the map doesn't show you where all the track is (that you need to use), or what state it is in. Why not do a spawn walk around the Hamilton yards, and observe the lovely crossings that lead into random warehouses - which you can see from the spawn point..... I didn't buy OSD until it was very discounted (and frankly, it really is not worth the £15 that I paid for it - it is only worth maybe £5 - and only for the GP9RM loco....).

No QA = Less Money

 

Congratulations, DTG.
You're already being compared to Rockstar, Ubisoft, Bethesda, CD Project...
You're on the right track!

 

You do have a fair point. Sure GTA and Red Dead Redemption are made by a company that is bigger than dtg, but those games are way more complex compared to tsw2. A qa and qc process to fix clear as day bugs in tsw shouldn't be as complicated than fixing a bug in gta for example. But dtg seem to prioritize doing QA for new dlc's compared to bug fixes that have been sitting with patches completed for months

 

I wanted to have a think about this part of your comment, before I answered, because I found it so bizarre that you could make such a claim about my PS4 game collection... and for you to make the claim so confidently. Based on nothing at all. You made a statement, based on nothing at all. It's a bit odd. It's like you did no QA on your comment. Anyway - here is my response, and why you are simply wrong on multiple counts (and I am basing this on real factual information and trying to keep it on topic):

- I tend to buy most games shortly after release. Most of these games are independent titles from very small software houses (not Bethesda or Rockstar)..... with hardly any staff. I like to invest in small independent software houses because if you don't, then the scene loses a lot of variety. These guys are interesting because they take some risks on content. But what they don't risk is the QA - they are always spot on perfect quality, fully tested and working, and you can have confidence in buying their work if you are willing to explore new ideas. Bad QA would be one risk too far, and that would sink them. Anyway......

More QA = More Money.


- It is not possible to play x200 large scale games, but for games like Fallout 76 (I am currently on about 1400 hours.....) and RDR2, which launch with premium pricing.... then I will wait for the initial feedback. I want them, and I will pay for them at premium price if they work. But in the very rare event that the game is bugged to death at launch (as both of these were), then I wait until they are not bugged to death, at which point the price has fallen off a cliff. So....

Less QA = Less Money.


- If a company has a reputation for poor quality at launch (but I want their stuff anyway), then I will almost always wait for heavy discounts, and hopefully for bug fixes. This is the case (mostly) with DTG's stuff. The only new stuff I buy from DTG is when they do the annual release with x3 routes. So this is an example of:

No QA = Less Money


- However, if I know outright that a product will be very high quality, then not only will I buy the product at launch (without worrying about reviews), but I will also buy the system that you need to play it, whether it is a new PC or a console. Every generation of PS4 that I have purchased has only been bought when the latest Gran Turismo has released. I bought my last PC to play Forza - and only then did I actually get TS2012..... (and more recently, Flight Sim 2020, at full price - at full quality).

Lots of QA = Lots of money for the software and for the new platform


- What I will say is that I never ever pre-order anything. This is an extremely bad idea. By pre-ordering you are doing two things - you are flooding cash into a company, and you are forcing them to release something that isn't ready. This was the perfect storm for stuff like Cyberpunk. I really want to play Cyberpunk - and I will do so, when it is ready - when they have completed the QA, and at a fraction of the launch cost.... So.....

No QA = Less Money


I am really not sure how much more I can say to make my point, which is:

QA = More Money

and

No QA = Less Money

Someone should let the Finance guys know about this.

 

I don't pre order content either to be honest.

 

DTG do have QA, I can tell that because their stuff actually works, unlike Game Tycoon 1.5, made by an indie studio, that was released on Steam... without the .exe file - when they patched that, what players got was an ugly, buggy mess that barely works as a piece of software, let alone a game.

 

I did say "I suspect." I could equally have said "I deduce." And I deduce it because of your declaration that all these games of yours were purchased bug-free... and the notion that one can buy a game, any game, in launch state without bugs is a claim which flies in the face of reality- especially since I have many of the same games and I know exactly how buggy they were at release. Ergo, you must have bought them after they were patched.

Your contention that DTG are some sort of weird outlier in releasing games with bugs in is simply a wild and baseless assertion.

 

Regarding QA/QC, we need to make sure a route like SEHS, with the state that it is in, is NEVER approved before release, ever again. It is truly an embarrassment of a line when it comes to the scenery.

How on earth did this get approved by all departments as its scenery is nothing short of poor, with the HS1 section being atrocious. I’m not exaggerating when I say atrocious - it looks like it was built by someone who has never used the UE4 editor before.

 

SHS was built for TS 2012, where it is known (for other readers) as London-Favesham. It's an almost identical copy (although two stations were re-built for TSW 2) . It was approved (loosely speaking) for TS 2012.

I just hope that London-Brighton doesn't get (only) the same treatment. It has circa 2007 content floating around in it.

I think a first step would be to not give out a release date for Rush Hour, until QA is fully and conclusively completed for the Rush Hour package. I find it really quite disturbing that on Tuesday's Rushed Hour Roadmap stream they were talking about still choosing what features to put into Rush Hour* [see EDIT PS below]..... These should have been decided a year ago....! They should be going through QA now.... not being selected for development, for release in three months from now.... for Citrix's sake...!

---------
*EDIT to ADD: I am referring to "core" update features here, for the TSW 2 update, not the Rush Hour DLC routes.

 

And that would be the case, if I had contended that DTG was an outlier, or asserted that DTG was an outlier. But I didn't say anything about DTG being an outlier. So, again, your comment seems to have failed the QA check. I am starting to doubt how reliable the information you provide is.

I actually gave specific examples of buggy games, and general indications of how I undertake purchasing decisions around my expectations of quality - this makes it clear that I understand that there are many games out there that are buggy. I just don't buy them - or certainly not at full price.

No QA = Less Money


That's why 98.7% of my games (most of which are bought at launch) are bug-free. I try to avoid the crap.

QA = More Money


DTG is sort of unique though - in my collection. (To be clear - in a Venn diagram, this is the circle with stuff in it that is in MY collection - it is not the universal set of everything ever published by everyone.....). DTG is unique (in my collection) because it is the only really buggy stuff that I have (even Fallout 76 now works). To be clear again - I do not own everything that has ever been published.

It is also unique because I really love their stuff. And I really mean "really". Like, I have certainly donated at least £1000 into their coffers. So - they are certainly getting money from me, even without the quality I would ideally want. Maybe that's why I keep banging on about QA - as a faithful customer, I want something better. If I had an expectation (and delivery) of quality from DTG then this number would be closer to £3000, and the money wouldn't just leave my pocket in larger amounts, it would leave my pocket faster.

Just imagine how much more money DTG could get their hands on (and more quickly), if they made their products according to some sort of quality standard....! Some of that money would go directly to the Finance people. So - it is in the best interests of DTG's Finance people to let the Product Release people know that:

QA = More Money, More Quickly

 

You really think DTG can keep a route in development for 15 months, and stay in business? To cover a 150% increase in production time, DTG would have to sell new routes for $75 to break even- and how many players would buy at that price?.

 

Wrong. More gross revenue (maybe) more slowly, less net, because costs skyrocket. You think QA is free? You think delayed releases cost nothing?

 

Given the number of bugs that players can identify, there is definitely a free source of testing for DTG... It's the fixing part that has a cost, and DTG would prefer to do this several years after release.

 

DTG should really factor in 1 month where development resources (artists, coders) would continue to be available to polish a route/rolling stock in the immediate aftermath of release. This would also free up Adam's team to concentrate on improvements rather than bugfixes, and at least that way said DLC should work as advertised instead of being buggy for months/years after.

 

Working in the IT industry - I agree completely. There is no such thing as bug free software. It just doesn't happen. Its a game of increasing efforts for diminishing returns.

Paul

 

I have no idea where you are getting your information from - it really sounds like you make it up. Unless you have an execptionally detailed insight into DTG's accounts, and workflow, and sales numbers, you cannot use numbers like "15 months" and "$75"...... What basis do you have for that? Could it be none whatsoever....?

Anyway - when you had issues with the Bakerloo Line - a bug that made the DLC "completely unplayable" for you, I believed you. I believed you despite never encountering the bug myself (and 70% do not encounter it), and despite it appearing on the RoadMap for fixing but then removed from the Roadmap because DTG's team claimed that they could not reproduce it. However, I quickly isolated that bug (across platforms), gave you reproduction notes, and gave you a workaround on how to avoid the bug until it is fixed. I put in the time for you (and the other 30%) to help you justify getting the bug fixed.

Now - I am not asking for any thanks, or even any reasonable levels of respect (I never expect gratitude from anyone - not these days, but some respect would be nice....) - but I am asking you this:

"Do you think that the Bakerloo Line fault with the Main Reservoir shutting down should be fixed?" Should DTG put in a few minutes of QA and/or development time to fix it? Or should they just look at that work in terms of "new" person-hour cost, and ignore that the fault could be the off-ramp from TSW 2 for 30% of their customers..... (and deny themselves future DLC revenue, because, you know, future revenue doesn't matter, because it doesn't appear on today's balance sheet....?

No QA = Less Money