Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

This forum is for discussion of any DTG products in development and also WIP Reports of DTG's DLC products

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby OpenRailer90 » Wed Dec 20, 2017 10:49 pm

It's so pathetic especially that DTG's very last release, the APT-P was of remarkable standards. Having broken functions after a near-perfect release is such a major low. The NJT F40PH's issues were addressed so idk why they would add more issues.
OpenRailer90
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 6:34 pm

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby PennCentral670 » Wed Dec 20, 2017 11:45 pm

OpenRailer90 wrote:It's so pathetic especially that DTG's very last release, the APT-P was of remarkable standards. Having broken functions after a near-perfect release is such a major low. The NJT F40PH's issues were addressed so idk why they would add more issues.

What do you mean about DTG's last release? What's this all about and is it true?
User avatar
PennCentral670
 
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 10:17 am
Location: Westchester County, New York

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby Kevin » Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:03 am

Those tracks across the street haven't been used for years.
In any case, they never served the cement plant, which was built in 2006. They served a warehouse which previously existed on the site.

ex-railwayman wrote: I'm positive in real life you could have been able to park up an SW1200/1500/MP15 on both of those 2 roads, before the metal gate was situated there, and rail access to the cement plant was curtailed, possibly even position a solitary 2 bay cement hopper there, and be able to change the point levers effectively.
Cheerz. Steve.
Last edited by Kevin on Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Kevin
User avatar
Kevin
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:03 am
Location: Alameda, California

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby BNSFdude » Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:32 am

The route overall is very nice with plenty of new opportunities for operations. The Nippon Sharyo stock looks great, and sounds pretty good, but the brake schedule issues make running them a little disappointing. The F40 on the other hand is missing an entire back wall of detail, and there's so many bugs with it that make it undriveable. Not to mention a huge FPS issue with the F40 and N-S stock when sitting as static consists by defaulting the damned cab lights to on when not player controlled. Of course the lights are all shadow casting so having more than one static consist in a scene will tank FPS. I'm running an i7 7700k, and a 1070, so the performance hit is absolutely unacceptable.

Don't get me started on this.
20171220225134_1.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Anthony Wood
Audio Engineer - Searchlight Simulations
User avatar
BNSFdude
 
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:46 am

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby Kevin » Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:45 am

Another likely performance hit is the fact that the highly detailed gallery car cab view is also used in the external view for no obvious gain.

BNSFdude wrote:The route overall is very nice with plenty of new opportunities for operations. The Nippon Sharyo stock looks great, and sounds pretty good, but the brake schedule issues make running them a little disappointing. The F40 on the other hand is missing an entire back wall of detail, and there's so many bugs with it that make it undriveable. Not to mention a huge FPS issue with the F40 and N-S stock when sitting as static consists by defaulting the damned cab lights to on when not player controlled. Of course the lights are all shadow casting so having more than one static consist in a scene will tank FPS. I'm running an i7 7700k, and a 1070, so the performance hit is absolutely unacceptable.

Don't get me started on this.
20171220225134_1.jpg
Kevin
User avatar
Kevin
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:03 am
Location: Alameda, California

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby BNSFdude » Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:58 am

Kevin wrote:Another likely performance hit is the fact that the highly detailed gallery car cab view is also used in the external view for no obvious gain.

From what I read, too, every issue I've listed was noted in QA and spat out anyways. *!rolleyes!* A great example of why I'm on the outside looking in.
Anthony Wood
Audio Engineer - Searchlight Simulations
User avatar
BNSFdude
 
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:46 am

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby JohnS » Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:57 am

BNSFdude wrote:The brakes on the F40... yikes.

I saw that too. !*roll-laugh*!
User avatar
JohnS
 
Posts: 1116
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:48 am
Location: Portage IN

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby JohnS » Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:00 am

BNSFdude wrote:I don't even mean just the gauges, the brakes are just about unusable on this. The F40 and galleries should have the 24RL like brake schedule that NJT has... I think it's called 26E, whereas they have that on the Baby Bullet stock which should have 30CDW.

The brakes are about as bad as the stock PSL equipment was.

At least I was able to fix the PSL brakes for the most part and make the 30CDW work as they should
User avatar
JohnS
 
Posts: 1116
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:48 am
Location: Portage IN

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby buzz456 » Thu Dec 21, 2017 8:12 am

So much for the stupid comment over on the brand x forum about RWA being a shill for DTG.
Buzz
39 and holding.
"Some people find fault like there's a reward for it."- Zig Ziglar
"If you can dream it you can do it."- Walt Disney
Image
User avatar
buzz456
Site Admin
 
Posts: 20964
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 8:30 am
Location: SW Florida

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby buzz456 » Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:16 pm

I might have missed something along the line but with the F40 in the lead if the emergency braking goes off I can't seem to get it to reset no matter what I do. Can someone run the procedure by me again? I thought I knew what to do and the box comes up in the upper right corner saying that the psp or whatever you call it has reset but the darn thing still won't respond to throttle.
*!!thnx!!* for any help.
Buzz
39 and holding.
"Some people find fault like there's a reward for it."- Zig Ziglar
"If you can dream it you can do it."- Walt Disney
Image
User avatar
buzz456
Site Admin
 
Posts: 20964
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 8:30 am
Location: SW Florida

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby BNSFdude » Thu Dec 21, 2017 5:25 pm

In reality to reset PCS trip, put into emergency until you hear a click and a hesitation in the brake exhaust, then move to Continuous Service/HO, PCS will extinguish, handle to release.
The PCS reset time is supposed to be 60 seconds, but it can be shorter or longer depending on the specific locomotive I've found. Other times you get screwed and the PC won't reset at all.
Anthony Wood
Audio Engineer - Searchlight Simulations
User avatar
BNSFdude
 
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:46 am

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby JohnS » Thu Dec 21, 2017 5:34 pm

Is the speedo in the F40 supposed to have lit numbers and dots around it? Who do they use for BETA testing on these releases anyway? I don't think DTG listens anyway at this point. Reminds me of a saying I heard a several years ago, " you'll have to pass it so we can see what's in it". !*hp*!
User avatar
JohnS
 
Posts: 1116
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:48 am
Location: Portage IN

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby buzz456 » Thu Dec 21, 2017 5:42 pm

JohnS wrote:Is the speedo in the F40 supposed to have lit numbers and dots around it? Who do they use for BETA testing on these releases anyway? I don't think DTG listens anyway at this point. Reminds me of a saying I heard a several years ago, " you'll have to pass it so we can see what's in it". !*hp*!

I understand from more than one source that lots of things pointed out by the beta testers are not addressed before completion and sale.
Buzz
39 and holding.
"Some people find fault like there's a reward for it."- Zig Ziglar
"If you can dream it you can do it."- Walt Disney
Image
User avatar
buzz456
Site Admin
 
Posts: 20964
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 8:30 am
Location: SW Florida

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby BNSFdude » Thu Dec 21, 2017 5:44 pm

JohnS wrote:Is the speedo in the F40 supposed to have lit numbers and dots around it? Who do they use for BETA testing on these releases anyway? I don't think DTG listens anyway at this point. Reminds me of a saying I heard a several years ago, " you'll have to pass it so we can see what's in it". !*hp*!

I mean, they literally could have stole the very same kind of Bach-Simpson type out of the F59PHI... *!rolleyes!*
Anthony Wood
Audio Engineer - Searchlight Simulations
User avatar
BNSFdude
 
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:46 am

Re: Peninsula Corridor: San Francisco – Gilroy route

Unread postby JohnS » Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:10 am

so essentially we pay full price for a Beta release. They use the end user as a paying tester then sometimes ignore us still anyway. I feel bad for the new people getting into the SIM. I just hope they don't think this is how our actual equipment works. I do have a question, is this only the case with the USA add-ons or do they treat every customer like this? I know the company isn't in the US and has to take "field trips" to locations and heavily rely on outside information.

Anthony,
As far as the performance hit, what if we drop one of the LOD's off the car?
User avatar
JohnS
 
Posts: 1116
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:48 am
Location: Portage IN

PreviousNext

Return to DTG DLC Development & WIP

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests