Will be default routes updated to TS2012 or not?

[jimmyshand]

Ted I understand your point but it's not as if the older DLC is ancient, defunct and outdated is it?

Precisely. It still works as advertised.

If you want TS2012 functionality either workout how to do it yourself or be prepared to pay when someone else does it.

As I view it, RW is a base. The other DLC is a product that when released is complete. Dev work then stops. You are simply lucky that RSC decided to maintain backwards compatibility with those products.

Why are you so against products being updated? Why so quick to leap to defend RSC? If they choose to operate in the mindset you suggest then fair enough but why would you as a paying customer be openly willing them not to update anything? Bizarre

[jimmyshand]

I would like to see RSC make a firm commitment to updating their remaining DLC locos by the end of 2012.

One of my favourite locos (not an RSC product I hasten to add, 'tis 3rd party) was recently updated to 2012 but when it rains you can't see the track ahead because the wipers wipe the wrong bit! Can't see how that got past testing... a damn shame.

I know exactly which loco you're talking about there!! I've got a cabview mod that gets around that particular issue, send me a pm if you want the details of how to do it

[ashgray]

Why are you so against products being updated? Why so quick to leap to defend RSC? If they choose to operate in the mindset you suggest then fair enough but why would you as a paying customer be openly willing them not to update anything? Bizarre

That's enough please Jimmy. Your views are known, please move on.

Ash

[gptech]

This is a railway simulator....

I think that we have to accept that what we have now will eventually become out of date and unuseable no matter how much we have spent on it.

just like the real thing then.....


Demands for older assets to be 'upgraded' to include the coolest features TS2012 has brought is, in my opinion, akin to wanting something for nothing---the assets when purchased worked perfectly, did everything they were suppossed to do so can be considered complete. Just because the game itself has moved on to bring us more realistic raindrops on the windscreen, and frame rate killing features like projected headlights (which can be added even on stock that didn't have them in real life) doesn't mean any provider is under any obligation to re-visit older assets to incorporate those features. Many do, many more will, many in the community will figure out how it's done so we can all have the features if we so wish.
Consider also those running lower spec'd machines---those lovely new features are of no use to them if they effectively cripple their game so rolling them out en-masse only worsens their situation.

[USRailFan]

LoL..
Several add-ons have had documented flaws ever since they were released, which still haven't been fixed - e.g. the Hatchet Hill Quarry route, where several scenarios are impossible to complete, because the cars can't be loaded, or the WCML North, where the Class 86 stille does not notch down properly, the signal aspects still don't show up in the F9 map, and the switches at Lockerbie still don't behave properly.

[USRailFan]

...and then we also have several add-ons where the bundled scenarios may have been playable at the time of release, but have since been broken by RS.com's changes to the core.

[Oldpufferspotter]

Hi again,
Some other things that come to my mind are the work arounds that people create to get over a 'core' problem, and also the bespoke signalling that we get in certain routes. For example the Isle of Wight signals cannot be used by us in our own routes because each signal has been scripted individually for one certain location and no other.
I get the impression that the Woodhead route signals will be similarly non-compatible with other routes. It is that sort of thing that further complicates matters when considering forwards and backwards compatability!
regards Ted.

[gptech]

Several add-ons have had documented flaws ever since they were released, which still haven't been fixed............


.............and then we also have several add-ons where the bundled scenarios may have been playable at the time of release, but have since been broken by RS.com's changes to the core.

Which are certinly issues that need addressing, but are nothing to do with upgrading the routes/assets to the levels that TS2012 affords.

[AndyM77]

I'm currently thinking about buying AP Station Light. Packs but not sure... How do you think - will RSC update their default routes like Oxford-Pad. and NC-York? Or maybe they will preder to leave them this way just because there are so many third party scenarios made for these route already and most of them may be hurt? And if they update them to TS2012 standard in the nearest future - how AP station light. packs will work with them in that case???

To get back to the original question...

I bought the station lighting packs in the recent sale, and couldn't be happier. Look at it this way, RSC have not updated the "default" routes with lighting as it is a time consuming task even if you do it the easy way (just placing the diffuse light asset in the world editor), time which could be spent fixing things which is more important IMO. Richard (AP) has used his time and done it 'properly', i.e added the lights as child objects so they'll light up wherever the assets are placed and not just within the default route(s).

I reckon that if you were to purchase the lighting pack(s) you'll at least have one years usage out of the pack(s) before RSC even think about adding lights to the default route. (Their priority is DLC releases, core updates and major bug fixing - minor 'c' category stuff such as adding lights, etc.. won't happen).

[FoggyMorning]

I'm currently thinking about buying AP Station Light. Packs but not sure... How do you think - will RSC update their default routes like Oxford-Pad. and NC-York? Or maybe they will preder to leave them this way just because there are so many third party scenarios made for these route already and most of them may be hurt? And if they update them to TS2012 standard in the nearest future - how AP station light. packs will work with them in that case???

Richard (AP) has used his time and done it 'properly', i.e added the lights as child objects so they'll light up wherever the assets are placed and not just within the default route(s).

I have to take issue with this I'm afraid. Doing it this way is a) quicker than adding the individual lights in the world editor (once the correct positioning of the child item has been established) and b) has potentially unwanted side effects on non-core routes that use default assets

[phat2003uk]

Don't worry, the lighting can always be turned off by installing a patch if you're using a route with it's own lighting and default assets.

Also, adding child lights on a curved asset (York, Newcastle, end of Paddington etc) takes a serious amount of time and trial/error as I described on a post a few months back.

[Energo7535]

Demands for older assets to be 'upgraded' to include the coolest features TS2012 has brought is, in my opinion, akin to wanting something for nothing---the assets when purchased worked perfectly, did everything they were suppossed to do so can be considered complete. Just because the game itself has moved on to bring us more realistic raindrops on the windscreen, and frame rate killing features like projected headlights (which can be added even on stock that didn't have them in real life) doesn't mean any provider is under any obligation to re-visit older assets to incorporate those features. Many do, many more will, many in the community will figure out how it's done so we can all have the features if we so wish. their situation.

I can't fully agree with you... Just because... Will we get another fully new Oxford to Paddington route??? Or any other new version for any default route? Or maybe some old locos will be done again from zero instead of updating them? And after all I am ready to pay. I'd like to see locos to be upgraded to the standard of JT Class 67 at least. There also several more trains of the same quality or even better. So I think everything must be upgraded. If it is about money I'll pay the reasonable price.

[dmaar]

I know I'm new here, but I'm going to voice my opinion on this issue regardless. I love this game, but as a new player I am troubled at the lack of product support by this developer. It definitely hold back further DLC investment by me.

So, here's why the "it was a complete product when it came out, so they don't need to update it" mindset doesn't work for me.

This game revolved around expensive DLCs, which is fine. However, that means that this game is quite the investment. As a new customer, and a broke one at that, I want to be sure that my investment will hold up for the foreseeable future.

These DLC packs are central to the game, and they will be the only ones of their type released. Take the Dash 9 pack for example, which is the first DLC that I downloaded. I highly doubt that the developer is, in the future, going to release a completely separate Dash 9 pack that works well with RR3.....and then another one for RR4, and another for RR5, etc. That ship has sailed, and that content is already created. What we have now is what we get forever.

This is why I believe that they have an obligation to update the current content. If you're going to make a game that revolves around DLC payware, then you need to update that payware to jive with you're updated engine. I have a feeling that many here are not gamers outside of railworks, but let me tell you, this kind of behavior by a developer would be unacceptable in a AAA game. The kicker? Railworks is WAY more expensive than a AAA game.

[gptech]

.......Will we get another fully new Oxford to Paddington route??? ....

You could have a read through this thread.... http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewtopic. ... 4&t=120731

...So, here's why the "it was a complete product when it came out, so they don't need to update it" mindset doesn't work for me......

It's not a question of them needing to spend time and money adding/improving an existing productbut whether they're obliged to do so. Older content still works, you can still drive it and if you miss rain drops on the window reserve the older stock for sunny day scenarios.

[bdy26]

Hi Dmaar

I think a lot of what you say is right, but unlike with many other games out there, Railworks is pretty much the only show in town these days. RSC have put in infinitely more interest in improving and developing a product than MS ever did, and MSTS 2 being canned is what began RW having critical mass. Maybe we should expect more, but historically that would have lead to a lot of disappointment.

I'd think that future updates would involve fewer new features that need to be applied to all stock so we don't have go through this again and fortunately developers seem to be upgrading for free. But that doesn't encourage speed.

There's a lot more freeware out there than people sometimes remember, and the freeware packs on UKTS and the scenario challenges means there is plenty to keep people on the UK scene amused for the price of a beer.

B