Just Trains - "Northern Lights" Route?

[ihavenonamenoreallyidont]

The Beta has been withdrawn I think, but he did say on our site "Please note my reskins and Freeware stuff will still be available to all".

Ah, okies. He did say earlier in the thread that the old beta was still available on his site, though. It's no biggie, was just curious to take peek.

[gavo01]

This is brilliant news.

Mully, your beta route is fantastic and together with the production team at JT this is sure to be a winner.

Here's hoping this route will be ready before my trip to South Queensferry in early July when I can bask in all the Forth bridge's glory.

[RyanT001]

Well I have spent a lot of time driving the beta and I for one will be happy to get the old bank card out to purchase this fine route upon release!

[Ajay1]

Congradulations on getting Just Trains to publish this route. I of course will be purchasing it when it becomes available. I have a question regarding those of us who have been downloading and updating Mully's route together with all the nessesary assets.
Will it be save to delete all the assets or will the finished version just overwrite anything already installed?

Ajay1

[bigvern]

Is that a 166 reskin in this screenshot or something new?

A reskin of the 166. Mullly has done a lot of reskins for this route.

Sorry to harp on, but back in the days of MSTS when you put out a payware route pack, it was pretty much de-riguer for it to include custom rolling stock. Both the routes I worked on (Cambrian 1 and Southern Region) came with several items of new motive power and rolling stock. Pick just about any other MSTS route pack and you got a host of new rolling stock with it. That's why doing commercial/payware involved getting round in a group with various other developers/modellers all of whom could produce something for the add-on.

In the case of this route, I would have said a Class 170 and inclusion of the Class 158 (plus maybe a heritage Type 2) would be an essential pre-requisite. If you're doing payware then the bar is significantly raised and a reskinned Class 166 doesn't really cut it for Central Scotland. Imagine the outcry if 3DTS had released the Cambrian route but instead of the MetCamm DMU had reskinned the default Kiha railcar...!

[USRailFan]

If you put it a few years into the future, it might not be too unrealistic - from what I've been able to gather, the 165/166s are apparently gonna be sent to Wales and Scotland when the GWML is electrified...

[karma99]

And another freeware route is snatched up by a "payware shop".
And why wouldn't they.. minimal work for them as the route is already mostly built, they just get to cream their % off the top from something that was likely to be free anyway.
I can't say for sure that this is the case and that Mully didn't approach them, but I'm aware of at least 2 other routes that have gone down this road.

Some producers have agreed to it, others - to the benefit of the community - have told them to get stuffed. You have NO idea how close you all came to having to pay for one of the best free routes available which was already 99% built, a company just wanted to stick it in a box and make some easy money.
For another one the author was even told to ask permission from freeware producers (including myself) for them to include their already used freeware in the payware release. Yup they wanted to charge money for items available for free on UKTS and elsewhere!

This also happens with rolling stock.

I've been sat on this information for quite some time as I was asked to keep it confidential, hence why I've mentioned no names, but this situation has become rediculous.
Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with payware in general and I don't have a problem with people making money from something they invest time in, but this "reselling" culture for items that are well underway as freeware is deeply cynical to my mind.

This is a quote from a post I made on a private forum 2 months ago to someone who was approached about turning their freeware into payware.

From my personal viewpoint, I can't really hold you at fault with the current state of RW.
I've no idea how it's happened but the utopian dream I imagined for RS (and then RW) when it was first released where new content creators like myself could forge the way in our free time with a healthy dose of the old MSTS regulars, all learning and helping each other to create a great railway simulation free to all, seems to have fallen pretty flat as micro-payware has become the norm.
Suddenly it seems everyone wants a piece of what is a pretty nice looking pie, and I can't really blame them.. especially you XXX cos you're such a damn nice guy!

The problem is, and I am REALLY feeling this recently, that if you make anything for free for RW you're being taken advantage of. The current culture of "we expect £12 for a loco, £20 for a route.. oh by the way, there are no/precious few stock items, scenarios coming with it, or being released seperately, so somebody better make them for you for free" is utterly disheartening.
I think it's inevitable that everything is going to be payware soon enough, so best to get with the programme sooner rather than later.

I guess it's my fault for having that utopian dream in the first place, and my assumption that just because we're train nerds we'd somehow be immune from corporate greed

[bigvern]

+1 Pete, +1. As I said on the other thread about the £13.99 9F pack, I have no objection to payware having been involved a little with the scene in MSTS.

However as noted that was most definitely not make a quick buck - or high end pricing. The Cambrian for 3DTS had over 12 months solid graft from 6+ people go into making the pack. The Southern Region for BATS likewise was a huge undertaking and TBH never really saw a financial return on the time spent. Take any other addon from MSTS and you could tell a similar story.

Well I for one fully intend to keep my routes available as freeware for the forseeable future in an effort to at least try and keep the spirit of our hobby going a bit longer.

[transadelaide]

Sorry to harp on, but back in the days of MSTS when you put out a payware route pack, it was pretty much de-riguer for it to include custom rolling stock. Both the routes I worked on (Cambrian 1 and Southern Region) came with several items of new motive power and rolling stock. Pick just about any other MSTS route pack and you got a host of new rolling stock with it. That's why doing commercial/payware involved getting round in a group with various other developers/modellers all of whom could produce something for the add-on.

In the case of this route, I would have said a Class 170 and inclusion of the Class 158 (plus maybe a heritage Type 2) would be an essential pre-requisite. If you're doing payware then the bar is significantly raised and a reskinned Class 166 doesn't really cut it for Central Scotland. Imagine the outcry if 3DTS had released the Cambrian route but instead of the MetCamm DMU had reskinned the default Kiha railcar...!

But I already have the Class 158, why should I pay for it again? What if I want the route but not some hypothetical Class 170? What if I don't have the budget for a route plus three items of stock? What is wrong with just buying the route and the train (it only takes a couple of extra clicks to add another item to your cart) and minding your own business instead of dictating what trains I should run on the new route?

Bundling unwanted and/or non-essential items without also offering them separately for reasonable prices is very much regarded as unacceptable practice in all other business areas including the mainstream software market. I would prefer an approach more like what Just Trains have done with the A4 - including bonus scenarios for Newcastle-York Modern but not making it compulsory to buy both products together just to get one. The exception will be if/when a quality non-UK/US route is made, then bumping up the price and making a big bundle with stock included might become semi-acceptable.

[bigvern]

The Class 170 is essentially the default modern traction type in use in Scotland and therefore IMHO an essential part of any route that purports to represent the area. If minding my own business means not upsetting the cosy applecart(el) and the make money quick approach of the new generation developers then I'm happy to disappoint - and your impertinence is neither appreciated nor required. The rolling stock is not bundled with the pack to inflate the price, it is an essential pre-requisite just as with MSTS. Remember it's not just the "puffer nutters" buying these products, it's the casual customer who doesn't want to tool around in the scenario editor or hunt for other bits of rolling stock to make their experience more prototypical.

[TransportSteve]

The rolling stock is not bundled with the pack to inflate the price, it is an essential pre-requisite just as with MSTS.

Sorry Vern, but, I disagree with you on this point, and GARL is a classic example. The Class 390 was sold individually by RailSim months ago, but, the layout came with the Class 390 included and you had to have it, not just the route on its own which is what I wanted at a lower price, that to me is corporate bullying in my mind. I don't like the Class 390 personally anyway, it's a hideous looking EMU, but, the advertising blurb says it's prototypical for the period that the route is set in. So what !!! It's my chuffing railway, and if I want to run other EMU/DMU's, and any other non-prototypical trains on it, then I will do.
I want to be able to make a choice of what I purchase, not what these companies want to sell me, and if this type of attitude persists, then they won't get any more money out of me.....

Back to the topic of this thread, as I see it, at the end of the day, route and rolling stock creators aren't press-ganged into supplying their wares to software companies, I can only think there may be other factors in their decision.
In this particular instance, I think Mully is of student-age, if I'm wrong then I stand corrected, but, I can only summise that he hasn't got the time to orchestrate a full 24 hour a day customer service if he was to offer this route on his own website for Payware download, I can imagine that Payware peeps have significant aggravation if a download goes wrong and they need to be available to correct any queries, but, if they are studying or working and away from their computer for any set length of time time they can't offer to resolve any queries straight away and then word gets out that they're not to be trusted in Payware circles etc, and this snowballs. They can't help having a real life as well as a train simming one, and therefore I imagine that they let someone else take the download responsibility and problem solving and they carry on with their lives. Obviously, the company wil take their commission for providing this service, which is fair, but we must remember that some content creators are young people, maybe they don't want this Payware hassle, and all I can say is who can blame them.....

Cheerz. Transport Steve.

[USRailFan]

You mean the 380 I suppose, and the GARL is sold at a lower price for those who already have the 380.

[Darpor]

Yes, but what Steve means is that if he didnt want the 380 in the first place, he had to have it if he wanted the route as you cannot just buy the route on its own without the 380 unless you had the 380 in the first place from which you could then get the route cheaper. Confused, I am.

[bigvern]

Well I would say the logical answer if you can't resource a team to develop a full payware pack is not to go payware in the first place. If it's freeware then no one is going to worry about what stock is operating on the route (or whether a steam loco actually produces a visible exhaust).

[TransportSteve]

You mean the 380 I suppose, and the GARL is sold at a lower price for those who already have the 380.

Yes, sorry, I did mean the 380, and, you couldn't buy JUST the route, you had to have the EMU as well in the same package, which I thought was unfair, as I didn't want it.

Cheerz. Steve.