class 86 and class 87

[TElsmore]

Terrone, I must apologise for seeming to single you out with my comment, but I meant to 'attack' the mind set adopted by many in this thread.
A photo posted with little explanation, a post which smacks of "look at what I've found, now lets all pour scorn and derision on RSC" helps nobody. Compare this thread to the (very) old one when a similar issue was discovered with Just Train's class 20 and you'll find a world of difference.

I must also apologise for my reply, it was a little out of character for me, no harm done my friend. Yes, i remember the JT '20' issue well, i was one of the many who bought the model and had problem, but i also recall that JT were rather quick to fix it as I have always found JT's customer service to be second to none and they will always have my business.

I suppose that my biggest bug-bare (is that how you spell it!?) with RSC is that compared to such as JT who appear to bend over backwards to sort any problems with their add-ons, wether they mean to or not RSC just appear to have a don't give a monkey's attitude about sorting any problems that arise post release.

I just think that it is really poor form because at the end of the day they are RSC, TS2013 is their baby, they are supposed to be the daddy around here, and well...... they simply aren't behaving like it.

Cheers
Terrone

[gptech]

I suppose that my biggest bug-bare (is that how you spell it!?)

bugbear

Yes, I agree that the level of support and fix applying from/by RSC falls well short of that offered by other providers, those issues highlighted in this thread with the WCML should be history by now---they're easy to apply and have no adverse effect on bundled scenarios so why RSC haven't rolled them out beggers belief.

[keithmross]

Bugs? Bears?
Well, I'm pig-sick. Sick of certain members acting like a dog with a bone.
I am being forced to visit to put certain members straight and will leave with the hope that this will be the end of my association with this matter.

WCMLN is no longer my property and hasn't been for some time.
RSC were always partners in the joint project and responsible for testing and publishing, amongst many other aspects.
Only RSC can issue updates via Steam.
WCMLN was an ambitious project in those relatively early days of this sim and was rushed to release, regrettably.
The late 2011 update, on the other hand, was a lot more than a series of fixes; many months of additional work was done and released for free.
The update was beta tested by UKTS members before it went to RSC for their own pre-Steam testing.
The buffer issue was not identified by any testers prior to distribution on Steam.
The buffer issue is a five minute fix that only RSC can implement.
The Class 86 is wholly an RSC product.

I am my own fiercest critic (bar one) and I am not happy to or prepared to release substandard work. After all, a project which is a year or more in the making deserves better than to be released in an unfinished state. Likewise, customers deserve value for money. I maintain that my commercial releases do offer value for money, as I know how much time is required to produce them and the content is generally well received.

I hope mods will understand the value of this post and not see fit to delete it straight away.
I would not want to go down the road that some developers see as necessary, but I do not enjoy being targeted in a misguided manner.


Yours,
Keith Ross

[gptech]

Keith, I've just read the thread through again and bar one post asking whether the items under discussion were RSC's to 'fix' nowhere could I find any inference that your work was shoddy or any *blame* laid at your door.

[keithmross]

Keith, I've just read the thread through again and bar one post asking whether the items under discussion were RSC's to 'fix' nowhere could I find any inference that your work was shoddy or any *blame* laid at your door.

Hi,
This is not the only thread where this has been discussed and fingers have been pointed.
I felt it was time to draw a line under it.
For what it's worth, I completely agree that problems with DLC should be fixed.
I'd like to think people who have been here a while would realise that I would have dealt with such an easy fix if it was within my power to do so.

KR

[jarmstro]

Keith, I've just read the thread through again and bar one post asking whether the items under discussion were RSC's to 'fix' nowhere could I find any inference that your work was shoddy or any *blame* laid at your door.

Hi,
This is not the only thread where this has been discussed and fingers have been pointed.
I felt it was time to draw a line under it.
For what it's worth, I completely agree that problems with DLC should be fixed.
I'd like to think people who have been here a while would realise that I would have dealt with such an easy fix if it was within my power to do so.

KR

You are taking this too personally Keith and I have not read of any criticism of you. Far from it. I for one recognise you as by far the best route builder on the planet. Cant you get RSC to upload the fixes?

John A

[keithmross]

You are taking this too personally Keith and I have not read of any criticism of you. Far from it. I for one recognise you as by far the best route builder on the planet. Cant you get RSC to upload the fixes?

John A

Hi John,
It may appear that way in the context of this thread, however, stronger terms have been used in the recent past within other threads.
I can only bite my tongue for so long.
I have no influence over RSC, they must be aware of all the DLC bugs being reported to their support email - why they choose not to act is unclear.

KR

[Kernow2]

Thanks for the fixes . Have we also sent feedback to RSC? I know we only get the "its been forwarded to the team", but it seems they only fix anything if enough people complain. I have not seen any mention of the scenarios? I have one that fails, is this just localised on my machine?

Was the scenario the one where you take the 87 down to Carstairs with a Glasgow - Edinburgh train?

If it was, then my scenario had problems which showed up in the timetable view in the editor. I had to change the priority of the 2x class 47 RES light engine consist (0S90 Millerhill - Mossend) to get the scenario to work, to an 'Express Freight', which the dispatcher then gave a slightly different path other wise it sat outside Carstairs not moving and holding up the 1S65 and 1S63 trains.

Hope this can help - apologies if someone has already covered this.

Kernow2

[TElsmore]

I suppose that my biggest bug-bare (is that how you spell it!?)

bugbear

Ah, cheers for that! I did sit staring at the screen for a while before I decided to go with it!

Cheers
Terrone

[lenfish]

I always judge companies by how good they are at sorting out problems once they have got your money. "Nil points" to RSC I'm afraid.

Regards,

Len

[TElsmore]

Hi Keith

For what it is worth, I absolutely adore your outstanding work!!

I have had your WCML-N route since release day and it is fabulous.

I also bought both the London to Faversham route and your WLoS route at the same time, and to be honest I have played the LF route only twice, but I cannot get enough of your WLoS route!! it's fantastic!

I would challenge not only myself, but anybody else within this community to find any true train simming fan that has a bad word to say about you or your work.

Your are not simply a route builder, you are an artist, and I thank you.

Cheers
Terrone

[rkk01]

I have to agree with the posts above...

... the way I read this thread, I saw no direct, or implied, criticism of Keith Ross. The criticism was aimed fairly and squarely at RSC, as publisher, for the way in which they fail to support DLC products after release.

JT was also offered up as a comparison with a developer / publisher that acknowledges the ocaisional glitch and works hard (with the community where applicable) to resolve issues and release a patch. I am looking forward to the forthcoming Bristol - Exeter patch! Personally I would also include DT in the same category - unfortunately, errors might creep in, but the measure of the developer is in how these are subsequently dealt with.

[gptech]

...was also offered up as a comparison with a developer / publisher that acknowledges the ocaisional glitch and works hard (with the community where applicable)

Unfortunately there's a section of "the community" who won't work with RSC; a section that takes delight in finding glitches and immediately making as much out of them as possible--very much akin to the 'Sunsationalistic' form of journalism. RSC get it wrong, as do all publishers/developers/manufacturers, but the fact that they're RSC seems to set them apart as 'fair game'.
The downside of course is that whilst making as much out of an RSC *problem* there's the very real chance of attacking and alienating people such as Keith, as evidenced above.

[rkk01]

The downside of course is that whilst making as much out of an RSC *problem* there's the very real chance of attacking and alienating people such as Keith, as evidenced above.

Which is really not on - unjustified, when it is the publisher who has not provided the support....

RSC get it wrong, as do all publishers/developers/manufacturers, but the fact that they're RSC seems to set them apart as 'fair game'.

This is the nub of the matter - and lots of the other threads on this forum Yes, they will get it wrong (occaisionally, frequently, that's of no matter), BUT (IMO), what makes them "fair game", in some eyes, should not be that they are RSC, but almost certainly could be that they don't respond in a proactive manner...

RSC could completely* turn around the poor reception they get through changing the manner in which they deal with problems!

* - excepting some of the more beligerent

[jarmstro]

...was also offered up as a comparison with a developer / publisher that acknowledges the ocaisional glitch and works hard (with the community where applicable)

Unfortunately there's a section of "the community" who won't work with RSC; a section that takes delight in finding glitches and immediately making as much out of them as possible--very much akin to the 'Sunsationalistic' form of journalism. RSC get it wrong, as do all publishers/developers/manufacturers, but the fact that they're RSC seems to set them apart as 'fair game'.
The downside of course is that whilst making as much out of an RSC *problem* there's the very real chance of attacking and alienating people such as Keith, as evidenced above.

Sorry gptech but you still completely fail to understand the point here. I can never ever, in 25 years of owning PC's, remember ever buying a piece of software that was perfect from day one. Everyone accepts that bugs/mistakes will inevitably slip through even the best quality control. The difference between RSC and other software developers seems to be that ALL the other developers patch their software as quickly as possible after the problems have come to come to light? Recent releases such as Metro Last Light and Crysis 3 which I have bought have by now been patched multiple times to iron out even the slightest of bugs. And believe me, their customers are very far from polite in pointing out these bugs if you read the games forums!!!

Much of the frustration expressed on this forum, at least from my point of view, stems from a simple question for which I just cant think of a rational answer: Why don't RSC patch their products when problems come to light??? It's not even as if there is any work involved in doing so as so many fixes are available for free on this and other sites??? All they have to do is upload to Steam??? I have emailed RSC many many many times and have had absolutely no result whatsoever and it seems to make no difference whether I am polite. Or rude. I cant be bothered to any more.

Maybe you know the answer? I simply honestly do not understand, (and there may be a perfectly good reason,) why RSC do not quickly patch any mistakes? A couple of hours a week from one member of staff would do it with a return of 100% uplift in reputation. The only possible reason which I can think of is perhaps that Steam has high charges for making patches available?

Cheers
John A