AP Class 68 Enhancement Pack - Out Now

[rosschris10]

So the "as real as it gets" slogan kind to defeats the purpose of this whole amazing highly realistic "enhancement pack" that has 2D name plates. Not exactly realistic is it giving the fact the community are able to do 3D nameplates freeware.

Perhaps we will get 3d name plates in the next batch up dated packs the "PRO ENHANCEMENT PACK" with another price increase of £14,99 for that pack

[xguerra]

So the "as real as it gets" slogan kind to defeats the purpose of this whole amazing highly realistic "enhancement pack" that has 2D name plates. Not exactly realistic is it giving the fact the community are able to do 3D nameplates freeware.

Perhaps we will get 3d name plates in the next batch up dated packs the "PRO ENHANCEMENT PACK" with another price increase of £14,99 for that pack

You did not have to reply.....

[rosschris10]

So the "as real as it gets" slogan kind to defeats the purpose of this whole amazing highly realistic "enhancement pack" that has 2D name plates. Not exactly realistic is it giving the fact the community are able to do 3D nameplates freeware.

Perhaps we will get 3d name plates in the next batch up dated packs the "PRO ENHANCEMENT PACK" with another price increase of £14,99 for that pack

You did not have to reply.....

Neither did you but then again as soon as anyone says anything negative against AP you HAVE to reply dont you.

[gptech]

How many times do you intend to roll out this tired argument?

At a guess Ash, roughly about the same number of times the other "tired argument from the other side of the table" is posted.
As Merlin pointed out, there was absolutely no need to introduce claims that certain developers had "given up" on TS; being cynical, was this a ploy to start a row and get the thread locked before too many users had posted why they (rightly or wrongly) had an issue with the pack?
rosschris could certainly be described as "not the most eloquent of debaters" but his underlying point is a valid one. Too many, from both sides of the argument, take the "dual rule" stance. Nothing wrong with being sceptical, as long as you apply the scepticism across the board. His point of view is also one he's stuck to; if you read again the post that steered the thread down this avenue you may notice that the implication that DTG didn't care, couldn't be bothered, were "just taking the money and running" has now being tempered into one including phrases along the lines of "There is absolutely nothing wrong with that " and "Totally fair enough". Would that make it more a case of them "resting on their laurels" rather than a total loss of commitment?

Let's now be realistic….without the DTG model there'd be no class 68 for AP to enhance; yes, it would be nice to have 3D nameplates but the base (DTG) model doesn't (OK, the plate is a raised node on the model but the letters are 2D) so there's nothing lost there--the sensible way to deal with these wee issues has already been posted:

I'm quite content to enjoy both vendors

Right, I'm off now to play a bit more with the AP DBSO (using the MKS GLV cabview) heading a rake of DT coaches tailed by a DTG class 68....content as a pig in the stuff pigs are content in or what?