Atomic Systems

Isn't it at all possible that the Bristol - Cardiff section has been created BY Just Trains as part of their project and is manifesting itself away from Western Lines as a standalone Steam route ?

That would make sense, several key 3rd parties have been linking with DTG to release Steam versions of their already available work ... The AP GEML Class 90 for example ...

I'm sure with closer working relationships there would be less overlap of routes etc ? it's just a big co-incidence that the exact section of route is appearing from both publishers ...

Makes for common business sense and of course it allows DTG to showcase & supply their in progress DMU, which will have uses in other areas I'm sure

starmedia wrote:Isn't it at all possible that the Bristol - Cardiff section has been created BY Just Trains as part of their project and is manifesting itself away from Western Lines as a standalone Steam route ?

That would make sense, several key 3rd parties have been linking with DTG to release Steam versions of their already available work ... The AP GEML Class 90 for example ...

I'm sure with closer working relationships there would be less overlap of routes etc ? it's just a big co-incidence that the exact section of route is appearing from both publishers ...

Makes for common business sense and of course it allows DTG to showcase & supply their in progress DMU, which will have uses in other areas I'm sure

Nope, two separate routes, developed by two different Publishers.

Mind you, on the flip side, if the guy developing this route has just turned up half way through the creation process on JT's front door step to organise distribution of his project, then DTG can't really be blamed if they are half way through creating their version. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, I guess.

Cheerz. Transport Steve.

tycoonkid9 wrote:

31160 wrote:So if its just the main line without any offshoots that's 38miles with at least 5 in a tunnel, Hmmm

Hate it when DTG build routes too short, or those lines already covered by third parties.

hate it when people who constatnly bash DTG dont bother getting there actual facts checked before posting stupid comments. can you provide evidence please that DTG took the idea from JT or that JT took the idea from DTG or is it just a coincidence that both developers are going into the welsh market after such a long time of requests at the same time!!!

rosschris10 wrote:

tycoonkid9 wrote:

31160 wrote:So if its just the main line without any offshoots that's 38miles with at least 5 in a tunnel, Hmmm

Hate it when DTG build routes too short, or those lines already covered by third parties.

hate it when people who constatnly bash DTG dont bother getting there actual facts checked before posting stupid comments. can you provide evidence please that DTG took the idea from JT or that JT took the idea from DTG or is it just a coincidence that both developers are going into the welsh market after such a long time of requests at the same time!!!

Where did either of us you quote say anything about DTG nicking JT's idea,please illustrate that for me

Its amazing how many times DTG releases something that other 3rd parties are doing, it more than just a coincidence and no wonder why people snipe at DTG, its like waiting for a bus, you wait ages and then 2 turn up, this has happened a few times in the past. The class 321 is an example of this having built GEML the next item of traction should have been a 321 to complement the route but alas nothing until Waggonz said they were making one. Bet the 175 only comes as packaged with the route and not as a standalone item, so people will have to buy the route just to get 175 to use on Just Trains version. This is why we complain about DTG so much, build a short route which I don't want to buy but bundle in something that's new that only runs for a very short part of the route just to get people to buy it, make the route Bristol to Swansea would have been better as class 175 run to Swansea and would offer something that JT dont

DTG has clearly stated on train-simulator.com and on Facebook that they've created the route because they have received a high number of requests for a welsh route. They've said that they wanted to create a route in the south east of wales which will allow for a route to be further developed (via workshop).
A class 175 is being produced to allow for people to run this along the route and any other route.

As much as I enjoy Just Trains add ons, I do prefer DTG quality so I welcome this route. Having said that, I'll also be purchasing Just Trains newest route. Ultimately no one is forcing anybody to purchase the route regardless. So thank you DTG and thank you Just Trains.

david1 wrote:Its amazing how many times DTG releases something that other 3rd parties are doing, it more than just a coincidence and no wonder why people snipe at DTG, its like waiting for a bus, you wait ages and then 2 turn up, this has happened a few times in the past. The class 321 is an example of this having built GEML the next item of traction should have been a 321 to complement the route but alas nothing until Waggonz said they were making one. Bet the 175 only comes as packaged with the route and not as a standalone item, so people will have to buy the route just to get 175 to use on Just Trains version. This is why we complain about DTG so much, build a short route which I don't want to buy but bundle in something that's new that only runs for a very short part of the route just to get people to buy it, make the route Bristol to Swansea would have been better as class 175 run to Swansea and would offer something that JT dont

Why would someone purchase the 175 to use on the JT version, it doesn't contain any more prototypical mileage to run the 175 on as the DTG version, unless I am missing something, i.e. Newport to Cardiff?!

Also, how would DTG know what JT were doing or vice versa (not that you mention that possibility). Did you complain when Just Trains published the WSR route after the DTG version or do you just leave such complaints to DTG releases? I am sure it is a coincidence, although I am sure you don't want to believe it is.

Peter

This strikes me as one of many odd choices from DTG, at least from my point of view.

I have found a few of their route choices of being very weird. GEML and ECML are both examples of where DTG decided to model a route about to undergo fairly significant change. GEML for example was released without the Bacon Curve at Ipswich and to a lesser extent without the Crossrail works. ECML was released both with old Peterborough and without the Hitchin flyover, both of which were projects underway as the routes were built. This one, while the route is not that odd it strikes me as bizzare to model the route they have chosen and throw in the 175. I've seen over on Train-driver (or whatever its called now) they have done this because they received requests for both a Welsh route and the 175. If that is the case why not do Newport to Swansea, Carmathen or Fishguard so not only is it a decent part of the SWML but also a proper run for the 175. Or do some or all of the Marches, Newport - Shrewsbury for example, or the Cambrian. We don't have all the details but I doubt given the record this will have either the Barry line or the Valley network. Why not do a Cardiff network route?

It seems a very unhappy medium where people who wanted a Welsh route get a fairly minor part of it and people who want somewhere to run the 175 get a route where most of it doesn't see 175s operating. This isn't an attack on DTG, I quite like them, both with the annual upgrades and the brilliant quality of their routes regardless.

More or less the same route, at more or less the same time from two different developers. Gibbs Rule No.39 applies perhaps?

Regards,

Len

Yeah, have to agree that it seems an odd choice to present as a route for the 175. Given that they're based at Chester the North would have been more appropriate, say Chester-Hoyhead (Bangor/Llandudno even).

Not that it matters much to me, I'll still run the 175 on London - Brighton or Scottish East Coast if the mood takes me.......

david1 wrote:its like waiting for a bus, you wait ages and then 2 turn up,

Which bus driver would you moan at?

david1 wrote: Bet the 175 only comes as packaged with the route and not as a standalone item, so people will have to buy the route just to get 175 to use on Just Trains version. This is why we complain about DTG so much, build a short route which I don't want to buy but bundle in something that's new that only runs for a very short part of the route just to get people to buy it

Conjecture/guesswork/grasping for anything to use as an opportunity to moan in the first part; secondly you can't make a complaint/observation on behalf of a group ("we") but use your personal view ("a short route which I don't want ") as a supporting argument.
If people don't want to buy a route (for arguments sake lets say that's £25) just because it includes an item of stock they can't buy singly (once again assuming that a standalone stock item would be £15) would their views change if said route was sold at an introductory price of £20?...or if it became available in a sale (one must be due, it's been at least a week since the last one ended) at £18?
If the cost isn't your issue, and you genuinely don't want the files that make up a route on your hard drive, you can always delete what you don't want. Better still, cut it out of your installation and stick it on a DVD (OK, that's going to set you back another 40p or so for the blank disc) then you always have the option of re-installing if you change your mind...or even if your mind is changed for you because that freeware route you simply must have uses a large number of assets from the route you don't want.

lenfish wrote:More or less the same route, at more or less the same time from two different developers. Gibbs Rule No.39 applies perhaps?

Regards,

Len

Is it a coincidence that it applies here too Len?

Of course there is nothing to stop you extending the route from Cardiff to Swansea or anywhere else you want it to go. TS2016 comes with a completely usable World Editor for just such a project

Mike

It's confirmed the class 175 will come with the route.

It's a definite buy from me (subject to any major issues), but please please please extend it beyond to somewhere the JT version doesn't cover!

http://train-simulator.com/croeso-i-gym ... simulator/

08994 wrote:It's confirmed the class 175 will come with the route.

Really?...can you quote the part in that page that says so?

The only confirmation of anything to do with the 175 that I could find reads:

Our modelled interpretation of the Class 175 DMSL in the form of a clay render, confirmed as coming soon to Train Simulator

If you're guessing the 175 comes with the route because the page includes a photo, then it's going to be one hell of a good buy for many...you'll get the 175, HST, class 70, class 158, class 143, and some nice blue taxis.