Atomic Systems

gptech wrote:

smiljacc wrote:I don't mind giving up backwards compatability--but I want to keep my old version with all my addons separate and would buy the new version--so let us have 2 separate installs. A simple solution that does not seem to occur to Dovetail games.

From Matt's interview...
"I can say that we are looking at making the next generation Train Simulator an optional upgrade so you can continue to use the current generation product with all of your current add-ons, whether or not you choose to upgrade to the next generation"

NB---"WE ARE LOOKING AT" or in other words, an option that is being considered. As it's early days with few details how can you immediately *know* it's a 'one or the other' choice or even what DTG are thinking of or not thinking of?
Just like the situation today, you're likely to be able to have as many installations of Steam as you like so running an *old* version alongside a *new* version is certainly NOT out of the question.

Here is to hoping for some sort of compatibility between the new version and the old. I am beginning to get a feeling that too much speculation on this subject will start a war of the keyboards. Best just wait till the official announcement from DTG. I seriously hope DTG don't give up on all the older routes and rolling stock which I have fallen in love with over the past few years.

chris

I think personally the best policy is to forget all about UE4 until it gets nearer.. 2018 or so..

For now lets see whats announced for the 2015 update/relaunch or whatever they want to call it; according to Matt full details will be revealed at the Games show in Germany next month.

As has already been noted, many users have made a substantial investment in the existing game. I cant speak for anyone but myself but I'd struggle to justify having to spend a similar amount all over again especially if there remained the option of continuing to spend on 3rd party assets to enhance the existing game. And that's leaving aside the similarly expensive matter of having to upgrade the platform on which the game runs (and I'd need to, I'm at the limits of my PC's spec as it is just running the existing game).

It has also been suggested that the existing game engine is close to, if not at, the limits of what can be achieved in terms of realistic "simulation" in respect of train and locomotive physics. If that is indeed the case then I think I could happily live with it. I have this far!

For what it's worth then, I think DTG should draw a line now under the development of the existing game, perhaps picking a very few on-going issues to tweak up prior to closing it down, and put all its energies into the new version. Drawing a line would avoid any potentially disruptive "issues" emerging with a fateful last update just prior to any and all support being withdrawn for good and would allow the user community the piece of mind of having a stable platform for their existing investment going forward.

The new version will stand, or even fall, who knows, on it's own merits. For me, it would have to offer a step change in realism, both graphically and in simulation, coincide with a major upgrade of the home computing assets and justify the effective abandonment of my existing collection. All three would be a big ask, in all honesty. I'm not saying never, I'm just saying it would be a big ask.

1S81

firetrap1 wrote:Here is to hoping for some sort of compatibility between the new version and the old

Being able to have both on the same PC is about the most compatibility I'd want between them....it could be argued that most of the issues we have with todays game stem from the backwards compatibility with a game a decade old. I fear though that any move from the established engine is 4 or 5 years too late, many will have spent a considerable amount on the game by now and naturally will be reluctant to start afresh.
Still, as others have already said it's worthless crying over milk that's yet to be spilled so we might as well just get on with enjoying what we have, and what we will have in the next incarnation under this engine and worry about the UR4 engine once we know some details.

1S811985 wrote:For what it's worth then, I think DTG should draw a line now under the development of the existing game, perhaps picking a very few on-going issues to tweak up prior to closing it down, and put all its energies into the new version.

Perhaps the acquisition of the unspoken one's asset catalogue is allowing them to do just that, in part at least---minimal cost/energy in re-releasing the products whilst the main focus is on the future version? This of course will lead to cries of "we're being fleeced again, selling us stuff we can't use next year/year after next/2016". Without a definite(ish) timescale or more solid details though we're stuck in limbo. It'll keep the forums lively if nothing else.

1S811985 wrote:It has also been suggested that the existing game engine is close to, if not at, the limits of what can be achieved in terms of realistic "simulation" in respect of train and locomotive physics.

There is a lot more in this engine, I don't know why DTG is even thinking about updating the game engine, it not as though they even use it to its potential now, 3rd party producers like Waggonz/AP build better traction and rolling stock, better and updated physics and far superior sounds than DTG will ever produce and that's with the current game engine.

david1 wrote:There is a lot more in this engine, I don't know why DTG is even thinking about updating the game engine, it not as though they even use it to its potential now, 3rd party producers like Waggonz/AP build better traction and rolling stock, better and updated physics and far superior sounds than DTG will ever produce and that's with the current game engine.

So think what they could do with a better engine....
It's not just about being able to add the features etc you've outlined, but also being able to run them efficiently. Although some are already fearing that they won't be able to run the new engine on their existing hardware it's possible that a more efficient one will actually run better!

david1 wrote:

1S811985 wrote:It has also been suggested that the existing game engine is close to, if not at, the limits of what can be achieved in terms of realistic "simulation" in respect of train and locomotive physics.

There is a lot more in this engine, I don't know why DTG is even thinking about updating the game engine, it not as though they even use it to its potential now, 3rd party producers like Waggonz/AP build better traction and rolling stock, better and updated physics and far superior sounds than DTG will ever produce and that's with the current game engine.

I cant speak with any sort of authority to the technical ins and outs. Perhaps it's fair to say that the juries out on that front?

I can but agree though that DTG seem to have been uninterested in pushing the envelope all that much. I cant see that changing any during the upcoming transition period and I suppose I'm essentially arguing that it shouldn't. Better to let DTG put all their efforts into the new engine, and leave exploiting the existing one to the 3rd party and user-generated sector, than for them to rush out some well-intentioned last hurrah that ends up inadvertently hobbling their legacy.

1S81

Bottom line.

TS2014 is Railworks 2007 to all intents and purposes. That's a long time in the game industry.

A change is long, long overdue and yes it will eventually cost you more money if you want to upgrade. But so will a new car, new TV, new phone, new camera, new kitchen etc, etc, etc.
Nobody is forcing you to upgrade any of them and as some will say and quite rightly in this instance. 'It is a business'.

I'll be happy with any version that I can have the option of switching AWS ON/OFF... and anything else that stops me watching the train I'm driving go by.
John

Its horses for courses really, I have invested getting well on over £1500 on RS/TS, but I had invested a lot of money on MSTS too, I have a pile of boxed routes sitting gathering dust right now! I expect that once the new game arrives I will be investing in that one too, you know we won't be able to resist, as the borg say, "resistance is futile", only concern I have though is that cost thing, I can see us paying considerably more for DLC for it! But I suppose I could have a hobby like scuba diving or golf both of which would cost considerably more!

Just some questions :
- What will third-party developers do ? They made a lot of interesting stuff after all, pushing the limits more than DTG ever did.
- And will we have some new developments in TS21015 or is this product dead already when it comes to improvements of the 'core'. I did not read anything on that or did I miss something ?

I'm sure they will provide us with new content, routes and/or rolling stock, thats the only way they can make money to survive. But I need more to keep this interesting for me.

Albert

Fishing games are not new. I have played a couple of sports fishing games where you go out and catch swordfish etc. Found them rather boring after a while.

Interesting times indeed.

For me, it is going to depend on what the new game (I guess 'game' will be the right word?) will offer my particular railway interests. The devil in me fears that a new shiny game engine is 'only' going to mean shiny, modern, plastic routes. But I simply don't know that - I only fear it.

My hope is, that there would be some sort of magical signalling improvement... but more importantly to me, that I will be able to play/drive routes like Western Lines of Scotland, West Coast Main Line Over Shap, Riviera Line - to drive immersive late BR grimy steam... to driver BR Blue diesels etc. If I can't - I won't. If I can't from launch, I won't... but if it starts to come as affordable DLC, then I might.

Like others, I have spent a poor man's fortune on DLC since I joined Railworks at TS2013 stage. A lot of DLC I have tested, but not really used since. It's going to take a lot for Dovetail Games to convince me to pay up and join in a new game. If it's all going to be about shiny, modern stuff, then if won't be for me... My current list of routes and traction serves me well when I want to play... Sorry. But that's just me.

I'm all for improvement - but if I have no interest in the routes/traction etc, then they might as well talk to my hand.

I think that DTG / RSC will now have a great chance to fix up many longstanding issues, that could not be fixed without breaking backwards compatibility.

So I see this as positive.

However, regarding current DLC, one, it is not impossible to convert or open existing assets. It might not be efficient to do it in runtime in the new engine, but not impossible.

I do hope however, that DTG / RSC will consider converting their own DLC for customers who upgrade to the new game, so that we do not have to re-purchase everything. For that I'm certainly willing to pay some sort of upgrade-fee, as long as it is not a disproportionate amount.

And I certainly hope that DTC / RSC will make available a conversion tool for content created by 3d parties!

Kind regards,

--Tim

gptech wrote:

david1 wrote:There is a lot more in this engine, I don't know why DTG is even thinking about updating the game engine, it not as though they even use it to its potential now, 3rd party producers like Waggonz/AP build better traction and rolling stock, better and updated physics and far superior sounds than DTG will ever produce and that's with the current game engine.

So think what they could do with a better engine....
It's not just about being able to add the features etc you've outlined, but also being able to run them efficiently. Although some are already fearing that they won't be able to run the new engine on their existing hardware it's possible that a more efficient one will actually run better!

Totally true Gary.