Atomic Systems

tycoonkid9 wrote:These so called equipment duplications lead to confusion to those who want to run scenarios, for instance a player will need to own the standalone DTG 319 and the AP 319 to run some scenarios. And those customers don’t like to use RW Tools because they know if they modify it Steam will revert the workshop scenarios back. Welcome to another “cry and moan about AP and DTG” thread. All these companies want to do is drain our bank accounts into requiring newly released products to be used in updates for existing products. AP bumped up the prices of some of their sound packs and we are not impressed by their move. Get your s*** together AP because you are just detering customers from buying your older sound packs.

To be fair to AP with regards to this class 319 there releasing they have withdrew there old 319/325 sound pack to prevent people from purchasing that

I know I can come across as someone who dislikes AP in fact I am far from it I own a fair bit of AP stuff from his website and really enjoy what I own.

Judging by my AP Catalogue I would be classed as a “fanboy” however since the business model changed I have come to realise enough is enough.
I think we have been spoilt with the old soundpacks and was incredibly underpriced it seems. The hobby was brought alive with AP sound packs but that’s all changed, I feel like we are now paying the price for having it so good.
If you charge double what you used to I expect to get more bang for my buck, yet it seems it’s gone completely the opposite way, we now if we want to use certain EP packs we have to put everything together ourselves, once we have completed the included three scenarios, if we want to use the bespoke item we now receive we either have to use rw tools to insert the enchanced product, if we don’t we just have to wait it out until someone in the community puts together a scenario. I am fully aware people will say it’s easy do it yourself, but I ask why should I when am buying a product that enchances my already purchased product, surely it should be all done. Maybe it’s me just being lazy and not seeing the big picture but AP since these EP came out you have really dropped the ball on what people want, well me anyway and I highly doubt am alone in thinking am being short changed, but not just in the pocket but the whole experience. Why do I have a 175 on train simulator that isn’t part of the AP pack ? Why don’t we have any compatibility anymore ? So many questions I could carry on. Am sure this 319 will sell very well, but I think I will pass as I can already see the route this pack will go down, but il keep my opinion to myself as I don’t want to upset the people who won’t see anything negative said. I honestly never thought I would say negative comments about AP, it’s a sad day

I don't see why some are getting so hot under the collar? It seems a little out of proportion! I think if you compare the prices to any other hobby heck even a night out you are getting good value! I do not think people appreciate the time and effort plus the very expensive cost of sound equipment that Richard has invested into his business, yes business, so stop begrudging the guy a living and go find another hobby that is cheaper and less irritating to you! Nobody knows exactly what this 319 will be like or seen it in detail, or it's features, yet you lot are decrying it already?

rosschris10 wrote:What is with all the duplications.

I notice the people complaining about DTG “doing there but for the environment by recycling old content” are not here complaining funny that.
Makes you wonder how ap can improve something that is “as real as it gets” according to there old 319 pack.

The amount of duplications is getting a bit much now.

The 321 was more the case of DTG duplicating AP, I think? The 150 was AP "taking over" a 'retired' DLC, same with the Mk1 and Mk2 coaches.. Isn't this actually the first time AP seeminlgy are the ones doing the duplication?

After several weeks of 18 hour days to push this project towards release, its quite disheartening to see I've upset so many people with my efforts before its even out.

marcsharp82 wrote:Judging by my AP Catalogue I would be classed as a “fanboy” however since the business model changed I have come to realise enough is enough.
I think we have been spoilt with the old soundpacks and was incredibly underpriced it seems. The hobby was brought alive with AP sound packs but that’s all changed, I feel like we are now paying the price for having it so good.
If you charge double what you used to I expect to get more bang for my buck, yet it seems it’s gone completely the opposite way, we now if we want to use certain EP packs we have to put everything together ourselves, once we have completed the included three scenarios, if we want to use the bespoke item we now receive we either have to use rw tools to insert the enchanced product, if we don’t we just have to wait it out until someone in the community puts together a scenario. I am fully aware people will say it’s easy do it yourself, but I ask why should I when am buying a product that enchances my already purchased product, surely it should be all done. Maybe it’s me just being lazy and not seeing the big picture but AP since these EP came out you have really dropped the ball on what people want, well me anyway and I highly doubt am alone in thinking am being short changed, but not just in the pocket but the whole experience. Why do I have a 175 on train simulator that isn’t part of the AP pack ? Why don’t we have any compatibility anymore ? So many questions I could carry on. Am sure this 319 will sell very well, but I think I will pass as I can already see the route this pack will go down, but il keep my opinion to myself as I don’t want to upset the people who won’t see anything negative said. I honestly never thought I would say negative comments about AP, it’s a sad day

It is actually pretty easy to create scenario's I don't know why people don't try it. Instead of asking "why should I?" I would ask "why wouldn't you?" Unless you expect AP to supply 50 scenario's in their packs. As a former technophobe if I can create scenario's then anyone can!

Would there be technical reasons why it is not feasible for the AP enhancement packs to apply to all stock, as they are more than sound packs? Personally I would prefer it if they did apply to all the stock but it is simple to go into the scenario editor and swap the player service for an AP one.

Peter

It is actually pretty easy to create scenario's I don't know why people don't try it. Instead of asking "why should I?" I would ask "why wouldn't you?" Unless you expect AP to supply 50 scenario's in their packs. As a former technophobe if I can create scenario's then anyone can!

Would there be technical reasons why it is not feasible for the AP enhancement packs to apply to all stock, as they are more than sound packs? Personally I would prefer it if they did apply to all the stock but it is simple to go into the scenario editor and swap the player service for an AP one.

Peter am sure once you get the hang of creating scenarios, it is easy but for me the spontaneous and fun gets taken away. If AP was to turn around and say here’s the 319 and even 20 scenarios I would be first in the que to buy as I would feel it’s worth it, but sadly I don’t think this will be the case again on going on previous releases. It’s a argument I will never win, and one I don’t really want to, I want AP to keep producing high quality add ons. But I would love to see a bit of the old AP , one that made the hobby what it was.

DTG did a 456, then AP did a 456. Nobody complained.

DTG did a 321, then AP did a 321. Nobody complained.

And now AP have done a 319 after DTG have done a 319. What's the problem?

xguerra wrote:DTG did a 456, then AP did a 456. Nobody complained.

DTG did a 321, then AP did a 321. Nobody complained.

And now AP have done a 319 after DTG have done a 319. What's the problem?

Didn't in fact the DTG 321 get released before the AP one?

xguerra wrote:DTG did a 456, then AP did a 456. Nobody complained.

DTG did a 321, then AP did a 321. Nobody complained.

And now AP have done a 319 after DTG have done a 319. What's the problem?

Without seeing the product no one can be sure, but what they have done (which I don't think was the case with the 321 and 456) is to withdraw their existing lower cost DTG compatible sound pack. This means users like me will now not be able to improve their DTG product, without buying what I expect will either be a much more expensive expansion pack that probably won't be fully compatible, or it will be a standalone competing product. Either way it seems likely that my existing DTG model and bundled scenarios cannot now be improved with an easy to use bolt on pack.

I have to say that I join with those above who don't like the direction that AP product development is taking. I want compatibility with the base model, I want compatibility with DTG supplied scenarios and I want compatibility with career scenarios, which I'm not now getting.

Please can we also have an end to the "why are you bothered they don't cost much" defence of AP's products. It's a silly comment in it's own right, but also very unfair to those who's financial circumstances are such that train simulating is a luxury they find hard to justify.

GatwickSpotting wrote:After several weeks of 18 hour days to push this project towards release, its quite disheartening to see I've upset so many people with my efforts before its even out.

I wouldn’t say that jordi you are one of the most talented developers in the tail simulator
Community. Everything you create for the community has everything everyone wants and the level of detail you go down to is incredible.

ziggyshadowdust wrote:I'm less disappointed because I can still get the soundpack...oh wait.

I expect you'd be more than a little miffed if you bought the soundpack today, only to find that there's a newer (better?) product available in a few weeks time. AP have done *the right thing* by withdrawing the existing pack (and who's to say it won't come back, or are your investigate powers that great that you can also see AP's business plan after watching a short video?) although I'll concede that some kind of explanatory note wouldn't have gone amiss.

IronBidder wrote:This means users like me will now not be able to improve their DTG product, without buying what I expect will either be a much more expensive expansion pack that probably won't be fully compatible, or it will be a standalone competing product.

Once again, how sure are you that the sound pack won't make a return? When you used the word "expect" did you really mean to type "know"?---the rest of your post seems to be a statement of fact rather than conjecture or question.

IronBidder wrote:I want compatibility with the base model, I want compatibility with DTG supplied scenarios and I want compatibility with career scenarios, which I'm not now getting.

I want to live in a perfect world too, but wishes aside how do you *know* that the new pack won't address those wants? You're basically saying that you want AP sounds applied automatically to every class 319 you own but would you be willing to pay the price for Richard to deal with every variant/version? The line has to be drawn somewhere, and unless you have evidence that your worries are fact not fear, we don't yet know just what the new pack will offer. (Adding AP enhancements to stock not covered in a pack is really very easy to do yourself; just takes a little bit of thought (thinking a little seems to be something that comes easily to many UKTS members) and half an idea of how the game works---instructions for doing this yourself have been posted more than once in these pages, and not only by me)

By all means slam AP when you know the details if there's a glaring discrepancy or failing in it's scope or implementation, but can we/you learn what's what before hammering 'em?

USRailFan wrote:

xguerra wrote:DTG did a 456, then AP did a 456. Nobody complained.

DTG did a 321, then AP did a 321. Nobody complained.

And now AP have done a 319 after DTG have done a 319. What's the problem?

Didn't in fact the DTG 321 get released before the AP one?

My point exactly. It wasn't an issue when AP released "the same thing" after DTG did so why now?

tycoonkid9 wrote:customers don’t like to use RW Tools because they know if they modify it Steam will revert the workshop scenarios back.

They, and presumably you, just need to learn how it's done---workshop scenarios, and career scenarios, are easily edited with RW Tools or the game's own editor without fear of changes being reversed. Perhaps you should call on all scenario writers to only use stock that's on an approved list? That way you could guarantee that they'll work and it would save scenario writers having to be bothered finding the most appropriate traction. Of course you'd always find one who thinks that he knows best but I'm sure you'd soon be able to get him/her to toe the line.

IronBidder wrote:This means users like me will now not be able to improve their DTG product, without buying what I expect will either be a much more expensive expansion pack that probably won't be fully compatible, or it will be a standalone competing product. Either way it seems likely that my existing DTG model and bundled scenarios cannot now be improved with an easy to use bolt on pack.

Let's be realistic here and cut out the hyperbole. AP gave you nearly four years of opportunity to users like you to improve the DTG product. But now you want to complain because you didn't buy it?