Will Spirit Of Steam Get Any Dlc Or Has It Been Abandoned?

Last year the much heralded spirit of steam route was released, a feat which took up much of DTG's development time.

A decent length mainline route from a major railway junction to a major city terminus.

It released with a sparse timetable, most of the yards underused with no local passenger trains between Crewe and Liverpool.

A year later there has not been any sign of any DLC being announced, yet now they have developed another steam route which includes one new engine.

This leaves SOS with it's sparse timetable, with little variety. You can spawn on Crewe station and might have to wait an hour or so for a Liverpool bound train to turn up.

My question to DTG, is why has this seemingly been abandoned, there is space in the timetable for so much more? There is so much potential for new DLC for this route.

It doesn't feel like the end of a major mainline trunk route in the late 1950's, it feels like a quiet backwater line near the end of its existence.

If this route is now abandoned save for some fixes then it makes a mockery of the fanfare which was made of it twelve months ago. SEHS keeps getting DLC yet this route, in dire need of some to make it close to feeling realistic receives none.

 

The Spirit of Steam is the main reason I took the plunge into purchasing the Deluxe bundle.
DTG pulled all the stops in promoting it, and they still do. DTG still have it show casing the bundle pack alongside Southeastern Highspeed, Cajon Pass and Schnellfahrstrecke Kassel - Würzburg.
It really comes to something when I find that Cajon Pass, though not looking as good as SOS is more playable. As far as I am concerned with DTG knowing how bad SoS is, SoS should not be used as a selling point in the bundle pack. SEHS is far superior.
Yet even knowing how bad SoS is, DTG still ask £29.99 (US$37.50) for the route. Surely at this price for a route they have got to do something to fix it and improve it? I've probably only gave it a couple of plays in the last three months, and that was only to make a couple of short video's. I just don't want the disappointment of getting a spad after 30 to 40mins into a run!
Now knowing how bad it is, I wouldn't ever recommend it to anyone, and if I knew what I know now, I would never have purchased it!
It has given me very little faith in DTG products.
I do really like the ROG 37 though. But even that is marred by the fact that the 3D door modeling breaks in scenario's created in scenario planner. Also today for the first time driving it, it snowed and the flakes on the windows looks like out of focused bullet holes, and every now and then on entering a tunnel the inside of the cab is completely washed out. Still at the moment, it's a dirty big diesel, and I love it!

I really would love SoS to get the love, care, and attention that it seriously needs. I want to see it become something special!

 

As someone who never bought SOS, but would have if they had included a Diesel, I know there are plenty that do and can't fault your argument especially as you say the fuss that was made of it at the time. DTG always seem to want the 'next best thing' while ignoring the quality they already have.

 

I had no chance to finish a one jurney due to AIspads..

 

DTG's questionable quality control and consistant lack of interest in fixing errors in exisiting DLC is well known and long established, the main difference for me is with TSW that I can't go in and edit, fix or tweak the things that I could in TSC. Surely the people at DTG know that issues with DLC often go unfixed and that the community have often come up fixes and edits to resolve things? Why have they made this much more difficult now? For example one of the tenders that came with the 50's Riviera Line had no coal in it, I noticed it the second I placed the tender on the track. This was simply ignored, maybe DTG felt it wasn't worth the cost of fixing it, maybe they just didn't care, maybe it just slipped their minds, who knows. I dont know the reason I only know the result. I spent several hours piecing together a new .bin for the tender myself which I shouldn't need to do but at least in the end I got coal in the tender. This is now not possible with TSW.

I'm not going to go into my issues with Spirit of Steam as I've noticed some of them have been discussed already on the forum and the answer from DTG is that things are the way they want them. To be perfectly honest I think DTG should just ignore steam on TSW as they seem to have little interest in creating an authentic experience and perhaps genuinely don't don't even want to anymore. Unlike TSW in TSC there is an active and talented community of third party payware and freeware developers which are keeping steam on the sim alive and providing many hours of enjoyment to those who appreciate the railway atmosphere of a bygone era. TSC is an old creaky program which should really have been put out to pasture some time ago but there are still people playing it, creating rolling stock, assets and routes because it allows this engagement and creativity, I know people who enjoy route building or creating things more than driving the sim itself, and all of this in a program about fourteen years old now. People creating things in their own free time to share with others is what DTG decided they didn't need anymore all that time ago when they settled on what TSW would be, a decision I will never understand.

I wonder if there will be anyone creating content on this program fourteen years in the future, somehow I doubt it.

 

I will be sorely disappointed if the next steam release doesn't also get, say, a tank engine DLC that they also rework SoS to include services for the way they added the Acela to Boston-Providence

 

https://forums.dovetailgames.com/threads/spirit-of-steam-scheduled-running-times.55795/

DTG like to sell semi-finished products. I can't understand.

 

I myself have already put in a suggestion for SoS to have locos that would fit on Liverpool - Crewe since it was announced.
But nearly a year since it's release, and now we're getting a new steam route different from SoS, in terms of both scenery and year, a new loco that would possibly fit in the semi-empty timetable of SoS (granted not a whole lot of use for the 4F on the line, but still) but will most likely not. This is already ridiculous enough, even when SoS is part of the Deluxe Edition from TSW3.
It is indeed a mockery to those that wanted to see Spirit of Steam to have more of a potential for a steam age route than any others made so far. Feels like the promise for a proper Steam era route is still out of reach because of this.

 

Just a gentle remainder that -

1. 'Blood & Custard' liveried coaches are still missing from the timetable mode.
2. You have safety valves going off at almost all the times.
3. The boiler pressure drops down way too quickly.

 

If WCML Liverpool Crewe 1958 were to get a DLC then LMS 2-6-2T Ivatt Arthur or Standard 4MT 2-6-2T Belle with an LMS Bradford type brake van for Goods duty while Passenger duty Mk1 RMB Slep FSO. Diesels Green 40 20 31 45 33

 

Why finish old stuff people have already paid for, you need to shovel more crap out the door and sell that instead.
Thankfully there are other games coming out with steam locos this year and those devs all seem to give a crap.
There is Railroader which is running your own short lines in the late steam era on a Pennsylvania inspired map 60 miles long i think,
SimRail which is already out but they will be adding steam soon.
Derail valley's simulation update is coming soon which greatly overhauls every thing.

Remember when TSW2 was supposed to get preservation crew updates haha I do.
Or any SOS updates, they have not updated SOS for TSW2 in 10 months.
This is a link to the last TSW2 road map. They forgot the part telling you you will have to spend at least $45 dollars to get all the stuff they talk about here.
https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1282590/view/3356885688293602773?l=english

 

This thread basically sums up how I feel about SOS. Massive hype, massive potential yet now languishes in the bin of mostly forgotten legacy DLC. It is a travesty that the fixes, included spurious SPAD’s, now seem dependent on Peak Forest coming out, if then. That could be next month or October, for all we know.

And yes masses of wasted potential for add on DLC, everything from Jinty tank locos for shunting, to Black Fives and a rake of LMS P3 coaches. Heck I’d even have rocked up a fiver to get a RMB buffet car in there. Perhaps I do them an injustice but I can’t help but feel a pervading sense of laziness has crept in at DTG. They want their £30 but minimal amount of work to earn it.

 

To be honest, the state the route is it, I wouldn’t want and DLC for it. It would literally be unplayable. I think just like BML, it will be literal years before anyone actually goes back to do anything about it.

 

This is the key to the issue, for me. I actually don’t find the Jubilee loses boiler pressure too quickly. You have to drive it in a weird way (reduce to very low cut-off immediately after starting the train) but if you do that it maintains boiler pressure and achieves running which I believe would be beyond the capabilities of the real thing. The problem is that the timetable gives such ludicrous scheduled running times that it always feels as if the loco is under-performing.

 

1 & 2 are correct but 3 was updated/fixed a while ago.

 

It was slightly improved but still falls far too quickly if you have to “give it the beans” climbing one of the modest banks on the route.

 

Specifically the steam generation at high speed is more or less fixed but low-speed steam generation is still terrible as the draughting fix has yet to be implemented.

 

They also haven’t fixed the sudden wheelslip at speed either.

 

Also when is the sound of the steam from the pistons louder than the chuff, when the loco goes up an incline?
All you can hear is the sound of steam, either from the safety valve or from the pistons. I used to have a caravan over looking the Ffestiniog just up from Minffordd, and the sound of the chuff from the steam loco's as they climb the incline to Penrhyndeudraeth is incredible. You can hear it echoing up the valley.

 

Yes that and the constant safety valves, even with so called "manual" firing, totally ruin what should be the purr of a steam engine at speed.

 

I'm wondering if DTG are bringing out the Peak Forest to replace SoS?
SoS was a big route to do as a first TSW steam route, and they had bitten off more than they could chew. So instead of trying to fix the many issues, they opted to start from scratch and create a new smaller, more manageable steam route?
We know that DTG have/are working on fixing the physics of the Jubilee, hence that once again it's being recycled into the Peaks. Why waste the many hours of work that has gone into getting the physics right just to bin it. Shove it into the new route. Problem solved! Though we do get a new loco. But if they use physics engine of the Jubilee or the 8F, won't we be getting the same old issues in the new loco as what the Jubilee and 8F suffer with?

 

But why, the problems with SOS aren't with the route so much but mostly, as you say, with the stock and the steam physics? SOS is a fine route and I would argue offers as much potential for DLC and possibly more operationally than the Peak Forest route. Also at least SOS has logical points at each end rather than starting at a small country junction and ended at a slightly larger country junction.

There is so much space on this very sparse timetable for more layers so I can't see what the issue is there.

 

I believe they said they had used a timetable from the time if iam correct,if that was the case there was very little trains using this part of the network,must have been on strike lol

 

Well it doesnt match the passenger timetable I have for that period. Where are the Crewe to Liverpool stopping services?

It is a major route into a major city terminus not the Cambrian coast line. It definitely is not representative of what should be there. And they haven't even scratched the surface with freight movements.

 

DTG give us a model railway to play with but no new trains to run on it…

 

What you say feels a bit of a contradiction though tbh. On the one hand bemoaning SoS for feeling empty and sparse because it doesn't have the stock to fill its vast stations and endless marshalling yards, but Peak Forest, which won't have either of those problems precisely because it goes for a smaller more rural approach, without big stations or yards, is bad because it doesn't have what makes the other route feel so empty? I didn't enjoy playing with steam in TSW so will probably pass on Peak Forest, but on paper at least I think it has a better starting point than SoS by having a USP beyond Steam, which means even if all else fails, you at least have a pretty route, which you definitely do not have with SoS.

I don't think any loco DLC for SoS will come until at least Peak Forest is released, so that it increases the potential sales for any standalone loco by giving two possible routes to enjoy it on, which makes sense given it is what they did for Acela. But it could also just as easily be that they have the stats for how many people bought SoS or play it regularly and the numbers don't stack up well for a new steam train DLC. It is easily my least played British route, for example, and given how many people reacted to Peak Forest, presented as a new Steam route, with "can we have diesels please", it feels like a lot of people are not won over by steam yet in any case.

 

I suppose if any of us want realism in a train sim, then this is what is needed. Used by Greater Anglia Trains, for driver training.


Apart from the full blown cockpit, the graphics are pretty mediocre. But what do you expect for a million quid? Also note.. Even on this simulator, the monitors don't appear to be functional LoL!
I would love to have a go on that.

 

If DTG are only going to make routes they can populate with a couple of loco's we are going to end up being very restricted with content, certainly for most pre-privitisation content. SOS simply does not offer a realistic and immersive experience suiting the era and location it is set in. Even a couple of items of DLC would improve the experience immensly.

Yes Peak Forest will be pretty and will look lovely I am sure. Railways traverse all sorts of landscape and I don't want to just see the pretty routes modelled, SOS has some nice rural areas anyway. Peak Forest could have a nice contrast between the urban/industrial landscape of Derby and the wilderness of the Peak district if they hadn't picked the ridiculous starting point of Ambergate. I don't think routes just sell because they are pretty, there is the game play aspect too.

I hope the release of Peak Forest does open up the potential for some steam DLC for SOS but I am not so certain it will although both routes could use a crossover of locomotives both being LMR routes.

 

Well it is of course all relative.

However having a realistic timetable and small collection of trains to use on that timetable isn't beyond the realms of possibility.

If we can have busy routes like Boston Sprinter, SEHS and BML I am sure we can have a realistic timetable on SOS with a couple of extra locos.

It isn't a case of they can't do it, but are they willing to do so. If not then frankly SOS was a poor choice for the first steam route and maybe they should have started with a secondary line.

 

Its called "Fire & Forget". A route with a huge potential left in the dust. Not even a single loco dlc.

 

If you had told me on release day for SOS that a year later there would be no DLC for it I wouldn't have believed it. Especially after the hype and the fanfares surrounding it.

It would be nice if TSW had a nice collection of routes to suit all or most tastes, most of the modern period routes are enjoyable because they have immersive timetables and in many cases several layers.

Most of the "historic" routes so far have lacked something despite their potential. NTP is probably the best but it's timetable needs updating, TVL is too short really, the freight variety is good but the services short and you can't complete most of the passenger journeys as they missed out Bishop Auckland. WCL well that is half a route and the intercity train is missing and replaced by stupid layers and of course there is SOS. Peak Forest won't feel like a complete route and looks like it will have services missing or wrongly represented.

 

I'm just dreading finding a Jubilee and 2 x Mark Ones working the Buxton services.

 

Yes I know, if it does that really will be taking the mickey and will shine a light on how serious DTG take realism and immersion. Can you imagine them doing something like that on a modern route the forum will implode!

I actually hope the services aren't there as that would suggest a possible suitable DLC for the route.

 

Just looking Disused Stations and there is a 1957 picture of Buxton Midland with two rakes of LMS P3 stock (presumably for the very occasional through service) and a Push/Pull set on the Millers Dale shuttle though I can't see the loco and the type isn't stated. You can bet your boots we won't be getting the latter! Though as we have discussed by 1963 these were likely DMU operated. In fact, looking at the BRCW website, the shuttles were DMU (Class 104) operated from 7th October 1957 (Source: Operations | brcw ).

DS states in 1963 there were four "main line" services in each direction with 19 shuttles. Knowing DTG they will just omit the shuttles. To give us anything other than a DMU on these services and preferably a Class 104 will be total fictional nonsense.

It will also be interesting to see how much of the Buxton area is modelled. The Midland and LNW stations very much juxtaposed with a link line and the erstwhile Cromford & High Peak crossing over too.

 

I am afraid fictional nonsense is most likely as it has been the case with other period DLCs.

I think before DMU's the Millers Dale shuttle used ex Midlands or LMS 0-4-4T tanks either 1P or 2P. If we got a class 104 I would happily eat humble pie, I wouldn't object to a class 101 although it wouldn't be realistic as Buxton had very, very few of those and none in 1963. A class 111 would work as Buxton did have the four midland allocated power twin sets at one point. Some P3 Stanier stock would be a dream but we will only get mark 1's again.

 

David Hey's site has a picture of an Ivatt 2MT 2-6-0 working a Derby to Buxton service, albeit in 1955. Same site also shows 2-6-4T tank engines around the Buxton area though these may have been used towards Manchester, though again an early candidate for changeover to diesel.

In fact, the more I do some background reading the more I feel this should have been presented as an early diesel route, with a retasked Class 45, maybe a Class 25 and a new DMU specifically Class 104. The steam should simply have been a layer or random sub for those already owning SoS.

 

The SOS timetable is complete fakery. I believe there was a thread on this topic.

 

Hate to say it but it doesn't surprise me,there's hardly any traffic on it no matter what time of day you select

 

There's definitely been some work done on it, though? I only got SoS with TSW3 and in the transition to the new game, the steam physics went awry so when I first tried it, it was virtually impossible to even get up some of the inclines - to the point that I had to dump some carriages off the back of the train to make it to the finish point.

I played it again the other day and it all worked far more convincingly, allowing me to actually get up to speed and pull my allocated load, so there's definitely been some tinkering under its hood. If they can stop the AI SPAD issues, which I believe is also being looked at, then it's getting back to a point where they could consider doing more with it, but those basic issues definitely had to be sorted first. I'd be very surprised if the new steam route doesn't bring something to liven up the OG a bit.

 

Not to get off topic but what about true one hit wonders like the TGV or CNOS routes they haven't seen the slightest bit of anything added yet.Now for all the complaining about RG arosa/chur line gets at least it got a add on + a 2nd Swiss route so far funny enough RG even offered up a upgraded jubilee steam loco,go figure.With a new steam engine and route on the way it's clear the SOS is not quite been abandoned yet.While routes like the 2 above have long since been parked and placed out of service.

 

Fair point, I started this thread to gauge the strength of feeling. I would argue though that for some routes there possibly isn't a lot than can be added and they fairly well represent what they are supposed with SOS that certainly is not the case.

I would love to see loco DLC for pretty much every existing route if there is something suitable. I think loco DLC adds so much. It is livening SEHS up.

 

The one thing i have said and will keep reminding dtg of is SOS or some steam route really needs a 060 yard shunter.It may not sound like much but end the end it still be great to have one.

 

This. I'd love to shunt in the docks around Ditton in a Jinty (or similar).

 

Yes I too would love to see a tank engine DLC on SOS, It would be perfect for me.

 

Once they have fixed the physics properly, and released the manual fireman mode, then maybe there will be more steam content. Will be interesting to see the scale of the physics fixes for the new steam route and how effective they are.

 

That route is dead and is also an absolute fps storm

 

My opinion is that Peak Forest was chosen as a way to further develop steam in TSW, and by choosing another LMS route it allows layering between either. So my guess is that SOS will receive some sort of update in relation to Peak Forest being released.

I would definitely like to see the 4F appear on SOS in some way, and for the 8F and Jubilee to layer onto Peak Forest instead of duplicating those locomotives (assuming Peak Forest retails with a lower than usual price to reflect it only containing one locomotive type).

 

It would be good to see the 4F layered into SOS to add more variety but you are still going to be missing the Crewe to Liverpool stoppers which for me as well as the yard and trip pilots are the glaring omission.

 

In retrospect, I now honestly think DTG should have started smaller with steam. Liverpool - Crewe may have a been a great route choice in general, it wasn’t a good choice for the first steam route. I get a reason why they chose it was to appease CEO Paul Jackson and also that adding steam locomotives was the biggest update to the game since TSW’s launch so they’d want to pick a route that sounds hype on paper and just go BIG with the project. Now we’re in 2023, almost a year later and I feel this project hasn’t gone quite where it was expected to.

The original physics were broken during the move to TSW3, fixing them is still an in progress thing where in my own opinion it should’ve been a much higher priority seeing as it’s advertised as the deluxe core route for TSW3. Finally the route is impossible to fully complete due to AI SPAD issues. Forgetting the physics, this is an issue with the gameplay and this interferes with player’s ability to just play the game, which I remember being mentioned by Sam during the early TSW2 days as a number one priority when it came to fixes. I’m disappointed that SPAD issue is being pushed back to Peak Forest’s release as I’ve been looking forward to 100% completing SoS for a while now.

Anyway, to finish this post off. I now think DTG should have started much smaller in scope. I now think they should started with a rural branch line, say the Fairford branch with a GWR 57XX Pannier tank. Being only 22 miles and single track, the route could have potentially benefitted with higher quality scenery, in a similar vein to Niddertalbahn. The route also wouldn’t suffer from the lack of rolling stock like Liverpool - Crewe currently to does either. Fairford could’ve then been followed up with a few more GWR route releases each slightly longer than the previous, adding new locos and stock as they go and eventually culminate in a TSW version of Riviera line in the 50’s + GWR Castle Class with all previous GWR stock layering in, making for an amazing steam experience in TSW. The route could’ve then been followed up with an expansion pack featuring a timetable set in the steam-diesel crossover period.

I think I’ve summed up all my personal thoughts on steam right now.

I know I used GWR solely in my own example, one could say I have a slight GWR bias! I do like the other three companies too though, steam is steam no matter who’s running it. Whatever DTG do going forward, I just want steam to be the very best it can be. As much as I love BR diesels, the steam era is where my railway love is focused and it always will be

 

Wise words, either Fairford or something like the Lambourn branch which was by all accounts a lovely ride.
For the LMS they could have done something like Northampton to Bedford (around 21 miles) or for mixed traction and a bit further Oxford and Yarnton to Bletchley. But Crewe to Liverpool in retrospect was far too ambitious, it was never going to look populated with two locos, a small selection of Mark One stock and a few period wagons. As regards coaching stock, well my views regarding the lack of catering cars are now legendary but they should be talking to the builders of all those fine period coaches we now have in TSC, with a view to porting them over to TSW.