Page 14 of 14

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:52 pm
by _o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha
Hack wrote:
JPS2K5 wrote:I will avoid this like the plague, untill I can control a train with a HOTAS or Throttle Quadrant. 'Simulations' with a keyboard or Xbox controller are not my thing.

All we need is the ability to keymap - why something so basic wasn't in the initial release is odd.


Given the continuous struggle with international keyboard layouts, perhaps later the keys can be mapped? The provisions are already in place on the Controller settings screen.
I would also like the ability to map controls to different joystick axles, instead of the XBox gamepad.
I did manage to get my Logitech G13 to work with the most important subset of keys and the thumbstick emulating the mouse.

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:12 pm
by ArcticCatZRT
Been while since I have posted, no I didn't fall off the face of the earth as maybe some would have hoped! *!greengrin!*

Welp I decided to stay away at first release, glad I did because I probably would have been disappointed. Had some extra cash that was burning a hole in my pocket and I got the game, granted after everything that I was seeing around here and on steam I had very low expectations.

Opened up the game and performance was playable, graphics okay at their set level. Got through the tutorial then decided to play around, basically switched to medium and turned off the anti-aliasing(biggest improvement for me). I did turn the effects to medium so I had some good old rain on the windshield. Not sure what FPS I am turning with those setting about I would estimate around 30 possibly a bit more. I honestly don't want to know that actual frame rates because then I will be obsessed and basically be disappointed(FPS seems huge right now with this release). Biggest thing though is that they are stable which makes it less noticeable, downloading beta update 3 right now. Even at medium setting it is much prettier than TS20XX. Ignorance is bliss I guess!

For a casual simmer like myself TSW is pretty cool, nice bunch of gadgets to play with (lights, windows, doors) not very serious which I like. I'm interested in where this games takes us, though I will admit if and when it comes on Xbox I am sure jumping PC ship...

Guess what the old saying goes is correct "low expectations means you will never be disappointed!" so I guess with that marked me in the pleasantly surprised category.

Specs:
Dell XPS8700
Windows 10 x64
i7-4790
EVGA Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 2GB
12GB Ram
1TB Harddrive
600W power supply
2xMonitors

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 12:57 pm
by cbff33
NorthernWarrior wrote:We will have to take Derek at his word on that, but I do feel DTG need to acknowledge outside a very small group there is considerable disappointment at what has been delivered with the initial release of TSW. It really wasn't quite ready and with hindsight would it not have been better to release on an early access basis - "This is where we are, not quite what we want but with wider feedback and testing we'll get it there"? Certainly the beta test should have been for longer and less restricted access, maybe issues like the physics wouldn't have slipped so dramatically through the net.

As noted previously I didn't refund because I do have (some) hope that a phoenix may yet emerge, not expecting it to be up there with Run8 but at least passable where train performance is concerned. Can the dev team truly resolve the merging of a complex physics application with the UE4 graphics engine, after all the time already spent trying to make it work?

When reading on UKTS the response people have had from Support about only one save slot (that's all there will ever be) does not garner huge optimism - if the little things can't be attended to, then what hope for the principal items? Don't forget some of us already went through this with TANE - over promised then under delivered and only after two years and numerous patches/service packs is it starting to approach what N3V actually set out to deliver.

Not whinging or being negative here, please, just asking the hard questions a paying customer needs to put to the vendor.



The truth of the matter, is the beta, was a sales pitch. Nothing more, nothing less. They then released TSW, with the same, and in often cases, worse bugs than were noticed in the "sales pitch" limited release. This is the beta, phase. Except now, they have gimmicked everyone into paying them, DTG, to allow us to do the beta testing for them. What DTG said one was purchasing, was not what was completely delivered. From sounds, to physics, to programming, it has been funny to see this particular train wreck. But I will say, they are on the right path, and they did get something out the door. And based off of what I have witnessed over the last 15 plus years, I know not to panic, because the 3rd party devs, will be the ones that deliver the true fixes, that deliver what DTG promised, and couldn't deliver. That is what has happened with just about every train sim to come out since MSTS original release. I own TSW. I can't completely complain, as I have been one of the ones trying to offer feedback to DTG that they hopefully use to compare the variety of machines and their issues. For a below spec computer, I am surprised TSW is working as well as it is on this machine. I plan on a MB and CPU upgrade here soon, to unleash the full potential of the gtx 1070 i purchased. By time I do that, the 3rd party devs should be starting to release some fixes. I am looking forward to getting my hands on Searchlight Sims sounds for TSW. The sound package DTG released with TSW is an insult to my ears.

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 2:52 pm
by buzz456
Psst. It's a conspiracy with the hardware guys to get everyone to run out and buy upgrades to mo-boards, RAM and new CPU's and GPU's. Don't tell anyone though. The Russians are probably monitoring the forum.

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 3:42 pm
by Hack
buzz456 wrote:The Russians are probably monitoring the forum.

And meddling at Newegg. !*roll-laugh*!

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 3:48 pm
by _o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha
Following the diverse Steam statistics sites, TSW is still dwindling and is now at less that 250 online players per day. When you've done all the tutorials, run all the services, there isn't much left to do.

Hopefully a consist editor will appear shortly, so we can try some different train make ups.

After watching all those Youtube videos, I intend to explore some of those hamlets on foot using the 8 view. And perhaps try to capture a couple of nice screenshots with my train slowly crawling by.

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 3:59 pm
by ErikGorbiHamilton
buzz456 wrote:The Russians are probably monitoring the forum.



Just going to save this quote for later !**duh*!!

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:49 pm
by Shukal
cbff33 wrote:The truth of the matter, is the beta, was a sales pitch. Nothing more, nothing less. They then released TSW, with the same, and in often cases, worse bugs than were noticed in the "sales pitch" limited release. This is the beta, phase. Except now, they have gimmicked everyone into paying them, DTG, to allow us to do the beta testing for them.


What I don't quite understand though is why they didn't just release it in Early Access. Would have avoided some bad publicity.

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2017 10:06 pm
by AmericanSteam
By the rulebook.
DTG is following FRA safety procedure by placing "buffer" cars between the headend locomotives and hazardous material cars such as the oil tank cars.
FRA rules on Buffer Cars from Union Pacific website.

Buffer cars are to be placed between the locomotive engine and shipments as required by Federal Regulations. Buffer cars must meet the following requirements.

Must be a boxcar, covered hopper, gondola or tank car. The buffer cannot be a flat car.
Must have a high-strength coupler (grade E coupler).
The length of the car must be at least 45 feet and not greater than 75 feet.
Must be loaded with a non-hazardous inert material that does not shift in train service.
Gross weight of car must be a minimum of 45 tons.
It is the responsibility of the shipper to provide buffer cars that are in good mechanical condition. If a car fails inspection, Union Pacific retains the right to refuse to provide train service.

Re: TSW anyone?

Unread postPosted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 9:11 am
by OldProf
AmericanSteam wrote:By the rulebook.
DTG is following FRA safety procedure by placing "buffer" cars between the headend locomotives and hazardous material cars such as the oil tank cars.
FRA rules on Buffer Cars from Union Pacific website.

Buffer cars are to be placed between the locomotive engine and shipments as required by Federal Regulations. Buffer cars must meet the following requirements.

Must be a boxcar, covered hopper, gondola or tank car. The buffer cannot be a flat car.
Must have a high-strength coupler (grade E coupler).
The length of the car must be at least 45 feet and not greater than 75 feet.
Must be loaded with a non-hazardous inert material that does not shift in train service.
Gross weight of car must be a minimum of 45 tons.
It is the responsibility of the shipper to provide buffer cars that are in good mechanical condition. If a car fails inspection, Union Pacific retains the right to refuse to provide train service.


Interesting information amidst much bloviation -- thanks for the relief!