AI Traffic or lack of it

[Tony D]

Hi all why is there no or lack of AI Traffic, went from Paddington to Reading and saw 4 AI trains, no yellows no red signal. Seem it will get boring very quick if you just driving from A to B, not sure if other routes are the same.

[pjohnandlyns]

I agree. I think it's just laziness on the part of the developers. The only interesting drives are the C 166's where you have multiple station stops all others, as you say, are starting to get boring.

[Grumpy Englishman]

The gwr is one of the busiest routes I get yellows and reds all the time and lose track of how many trains I saw, it depends also on the time but the gwr is a busy route but certainly some other routes are lacking

[darkage]

From what I heard from Matt P. they tried doing a realistic schedule for the LIRR, but there were perfomance issues so they had to reduce the amount of traffic, because it seems that, irl, that is that much traffic on the route.

About other routes, some might be because there is rolling stock that they haven't brought into the sim yet, and because of that, additional traffic is missing, but once they develop that additional rolling stock, the current routes should get busier.
Again, look at the LIRR example, at the start they had only developed the M7 because, even not having physical access (the railway operator didn't allow them physical access to the train so they had to do research online), so initially that was the only train in the DLC, but as they got to develop the M3, it is now included in that DLC. Sooner or later they'll also bring the M5 for the route and it will be a lot more complete.

[Kanawha]

Smallest common denominator is the low CPU and GPU power of the gaming consoles, apparently TSW’s biggest and most profitable market.

In theory, UE4 allows automatic upgrading of features and complexity depending on the platform detected. But wether DTG implemented this?

[darkage]

Originally posted by Kanawha:

Smallest common denominator is the low CPU and GPU power of the gaming consoles, apparently TSW’s biggest and most profitable market.

In theory, UE4 allows automatic upgrading of features and complexity depending on the platform detected. But wether DTG implemented this?

It had nothing to do with consoles. From what was told, it seems there were performance issues in PCs as well.

Honestly, seriously getting tired of the "TSW is a console arcade game/for consoles primarily"myth. Like I get it, some people are really demanding (like me), but want everything now and can't wait 5 minutes. Also "not optimized, stupid DTG" (not talking at you or this psot specifically, but some other people/posts), when optimization also requires a ton of work and consumes a lot of time. Like, give them some time, they've been delivering more and more stuff and will keep doing so.

[meatballs_21]

Originally posted by darkage:

Honestly, seriously getting tired of the "TSW is a console arcade game/for consoles primarily"myth. Like I get it, some people are really demanding (like me), but want everything now and can't wait 5 minutes.

GWE was released in September 2017, how much longer do you feel is reasonable to wait for more rolling stock to be added?

[darkage]

Originally posted by meatballs_21:

Originally posted by darkage:

Honestly, seriously getting tired of the "TSW is a console arcade game/for consoles primarily"myth. Like I get it, some people are really demanding (like me), but want everything now and can't wait 5 minutes.

GWE was released in September 2017, how much longer do you feel is reasonable to wait for more rolling stock to be added?

Mostly, when they get all the licenses required to develop the rolling stock that operates the route irl

Also, last I heard, the was a company operating the express service to an english airport (can't remember if heathrow or gatwick), that changed company some months ago and DTG could try again to get the required license. That's just one example though. Getting licenses from companies is harder than we usually think

[meatballs_21]

Originally posted by darkage:

Originally posted by meatballs_21:

GWE was released in September 2017, how much longer do you feel is reasonable to wait for more rolling stock to be added?

Mostly, when they get all the licenses required to develop the rolling stock that operates the route irl

Also, last I heard, the was a company operating the express service to an english airport (can't remember if heathrow or gatwick), that changed company some months ago and DTG could try again to get the required license. That's just one example though. Getting licenses from companies is harder than we usually think

The joke’s on DTG, none of the stock shown in GWE operates there any more. They modelled a route that was in the process of completely changing.

Heathrow Express remains with the same TOC (Heathrow Express Operating Company), but they are introducing new trains that will be maintained by GWR - they’re from the Electrostar family, which DTG has already modelled (albeit a different variant) for the Coastway route.

The HSTs are gone. The 166s are gone. CrossRail is due to begin operating. Since DTG can’t handle licences very well (their Arriva Trains Wales DLC for TS2020 all had to be removed from sale recently, including the Marches route which had only been out a few months) they should stop trying to licence everything and either do historic or generic versions of stuff. I don’t even understand why BNSF was an issue, other sims like Run8 and Trainz are both still selling BNSF branded vehicles.

[Kanawha]

As with any and all promises by DTG: “soon (tm)”

Any change of operator on GWR means the short segment of route modeled needs to be redone.

Either backdated with OHLE removed, or updated with OHLE in working order and electric trains running.

Probably “later” than soon.

[darkage]

The joke’s on DTG, none of the stock shown in GWE operates there any more. They modelled a route that was in the process of completely changing.

DTG stated at the time when they developed the route that is was set in a period where they were still completing the catenary before replacing all the diesel rolling stock with eelctric. The question here is, will they update the current route for electric stuff, or will they leave this one alone and develop the modern version.

Heathrow Express remains with the same TOC (Heathrow Express Operating Company), but they are introducing new trains that will be maintained by GWR - they’re from the Electrostar family, which DTG has already modelled (albeit a different variant) for the Coastway route.

The issue, like I said previously, is not the modeling, but the branding. There could be 100 company changes, if none of them licenses their logo, DTG can't use their image in the sim, annoying I know, but that's the law.

The HSTs are gone. The 166s are gone. CrossRail is due to begin operating. Since DTG can’t handle licences very well (their Arriva Trains Wales DLC for TS2020 all had to be removed from sale recently, including the Marches route which had only been out a few months) they should stop trying to licence everything and either do historic or generic versions of stuff. I don’t even understand why BNSF was an issue, other sims like Run8 and Trainz are both still selling BNSF branded vehicles.

Run8 is USA only afaik and is even more niche than TS2020 or TSW. One thing you notice with sim content development, is that, you either develop a bit of everything and that way, you lay the foundations, and you have to spread the resources more to cover at least a bit of everything, or you go niche, that meaning, you choose one specific part (in the case of train sims, specific countries and/or eras), and stick to developing that type of content, which means you focus resources early one to that specific thing.

With this, I've said previously (months ago, at least), that I don't expect DTG to do everything, I think it's more like what happens with flight sims. DTG develops the core components and lays the sim's foundations, and then 3rd parties partner with DTG and develop country and era specific content and because of that, that specific 3rd party content will end up being better than the stock options, which also happens in flight sims. Oh and this also happens with Trainz.
And then each company decides how to handle the licenses they have with each sim company,
I know it's "cool" to find a problem and blame DTG for everything, and although everyone knows that they need to improve and fix some things, not everything is their fault

[meatballs_21]

Originally posted by darkage:

DTG stated at the time when they developed the route that is was set in a period where they were still completing the catenary before replacing all the diesel rolling stock with eelctric. The question here is, will they update the current route for electric stuff, or will they leave this one alone and develop the modern version.

Fair enough, but a very odd decision nonetheless. Why push for all the current licences and settings as a selling point, while modelling something that was more than halfway through the biggest change the route had seen in decades?

The issue, like I said previously, is not the modeling, but the branding. There could be 100 company changes, if none of them licenses their logo, DTG can't use their image in the sim, annoying I know, but that's the law.

GWR is partnered with Heathrow Express. DTG absolutely has an in to ask for this, and must have a good relationship with them given they have been presenting GWR stuff front and centre since the very first version of Kuju Rail Simulator back 2007 which was developed in cooperating with FGW, as they were known then.

With this, I've said previously (months ago, at least), that I don't expect DTG to do everything, I think it's more like what happens with flight sims. DTG develops the core components and lays the sim's foundations, and then 3rd parties partner with DTG and develop country and era specific content and because of that, that specific 3rd party content will end up being better than the stock options, which also happens in flight sims.

I understand how licensing works. I also note that DTG is very averse to third parties working with TSW, things are only now slowly appearing.

Oh and this also happens with Trainz.
And then each company decides how to handle the licenses they have with each sim company

It doesn’t seem like a good business practice to licence and produce content you might then have to remove from sale, especially in a sim like this where there can be so many dependencies interlinked. This is why many have said that with the BNSF or ATW issues that trying to focus on the ever-changing modern world, when instead using a generic placeholder or a defunct company (like British Rail) could be much easier in the long run. It’s better for the business and the customers.

Going back to the original point, it seems like if there had been any will to actually model TFL, Heathrow Express or Heathrow Connect services on GWE, they’d have done so by now.

[darkage]

Originally posted by meatballs_21:

Fair enough, but a very odd decision nonetheless. Why push for all the current licences and settings as a selling point, while modelling something that was more than halfway through the biggest change the route had seen in decades?

Honestly, my guess is that, they wanted to bring something modern, and at the time in that route, it was at that specific stage of construction so they decided to model the exact way it was right then

GWR is partnered with Heathrow Express. DTG absolutely has an in to ask for this, and must have a good relationship with them given they have been presenting GWR stuff front and centre since the very first version of Kuju Rail Simulator back 2007 which was developed in cooperating with FGW, as they were known then.

I remember knowing about this because people on Discord were talking about it, and if that was the change in companies that occurred, I think that's what people were talking about and wondering if DTG would try again to get the licnese, I don't know what the oputcome of that was though

I understand how licensing works. I also note that DTG is very averse to third parties working with TSW, things are only now slowly appearing.

The way I heard Matt P, talked about 3rd paties working with DTG, was that the comapny asked to be a part of their 3rd parties program., then if you wanted to develop content from a specific company for example, because the core sim is a property of DTG, you needed to tell DTG to talk to the company in order to get their license to develop content. Basically if a company ends up saying no, DTG and their partner can't develop that content.

It doesn’t seem like a good business practice to licence and produce content you might then have to remove from sale, especially in a sim like this where there can be so many dependencies interlinked. This is why many have said that with the BNSF or ATW issues that trying to focus on the ever-changing modern world, when instead using a generic placeholder or a defunct company (like British Rail) could be much easier in the long run. It’s better for the business and the customers.

At the time, the reason I heard about BNSF not selling outisde of the USA anymore was that, their brand was only registered nationally and not globally, so they wanted to avoid issues with that (don't know if that's an excuse, but that's what multiple americans said was BSNF's reason)

The thing is, and I recognize this is already an old argument, that back in the day, DTG made a poll, if people only wanted real stuff included and if they also wanted fictional stuff, and the overwhelming majority voted for realism only, so for most of the content, that's what DTG and partners have been doing

[markbolam]

theres no reason why traffic cant be scaled according to system in menus could have no traffic option little traffic option and high traffic option and even more customizable probably just lazyness on behalf of dovetail

[zimma]

Take a Class 66 up the slow line. Many of the timetabled services follow a slow stopper service so you get plenty of variation.

[meatballs_21]

Originally posted by darkage:

Honestly, my guess is that, they wanted to bring something modern, and at the time in that route, it was at that specific stage of construction so they decided to model the exact way it was right then

Fair enough. I remember they modelled the prototype class 80X (that now runs in place of the HST) for Railworks, including featuring it rather prominently on the box art. Oh well!

I remember knowing about this because people on Discord were talking about it, and if that was the change in companies that occurred, I think that's what people were talking about and wondering if DTG would try again to get the licnese, I don't know what the oputcome of that was though

No attempt was made, I’d sadly guess. Old routes don’t tend to get revisited much after release, which is a shame.

Basically if a company ends up saying no, DTG and their partner can't develop that content.

Interesting, I wonder what it looks like in terms of those third parties, if they pitch multiple things they’d be willing or able to produce. Or, if it’s the other way around (DTG releases what is in effect an RFP to have routes they want, built for them)

The thing is, and I recognize this is already an old argument, that back in the day, DTG made a poll, if people only wanted real stuff included and if they also wanted fictional stuff, and the overwhelming majority voted for realism only, so for most of the content, that's what DTG and partners have been doing

I wonder if there’d be objections to the drivable trains being the ones that are licenced, and those we see elsewhere (not drivable) are not. That’s an old argument, too, that not everything needs to be drivable, and that the world could be brought to life with low poly models of other trains. It could even be explained away that your driver doesn’t sign those units so they can’t drive. Doesn’t seem to be an avenue that DTG want to explore, either.