Why are these assets not packaged in TRS22?

[HPL]

Because if you have a Plus subscription, you can install TRS22 instead of Trainz Plus; the only difference is that you won't have benefit of features specific to Plus.

 

[pware]

They are only available for Plus users and can't be purchased. This is mentioned in the Store.

If that is true, why have a price?

Trainz Plus users and Gold members can still purchase DLC if they want to. In my case I also have TRS22PE (retail) which, as a Gold member, allows me to download DLC at no extra cost for TRS22 as well (my username and password allows that). If I discontinue my Trainz+ subscription then I can continue to use TRS22 but lose the ability to use the DLC content I downloaded while I had the subscription. If I purchase DLC content, while having the subscription, then I can continue to use that in TRS22. I have actually purchased some DLC content despite having the subscription.

 

[itstypicalrailfanner]

Trainz Plus users and Gold members can still purchase DLC if they want to. In my case I also have TRS22PE (retail) which, as a Gold member, allows me to download DLC at no extra cost for TRS22 as well (my username and password allows that). If I discontinue my Trainz+ subscription then I can continue to use TRS22 but lose the ability to use the DLC content I downloaded while I had the subscription. If I purchase DLC content, while having the subscription, then I can continue to use that in TRS22. I have actually purchased some DLC content despite having the subscription.

I think he was asking why have a price tag for dlc exclusive to trainz plus? Just remove the price tag for Trainz Plus exclusive dlc.

 

[sw1500]

I think he was asking why have a price tag for dlc exclusive to trainz plus? Just remove the price tag for Trainz Plus exclusive dlc.

I did mean that. If pware is right, then that explains the price being listed. @HPL have you tried to purchase the Superliners and was denied?

 

[itstypicalrailfanner]

I did mean that. If pware is right, then that explains the price being listed. @HPL have you tried to purchase the Superliners and was denied?

That's the thing, you can't purchase the superliners. There's no option to purchase them.

 

[sw1500]

That's the thing, you can't purchase the superliners. There's no option to purchase them.

Ok. I went to the Trainz Store without going through my account and like others have said there is no purchase option.

 

[Paulsw2]

That's the problem. You don't see anything wrong with locking some dlc behind a subscription. That's an issue for people who actually want to purchase the dlc. It's absolutely not a benefit. DTG don't do that with Train Sim Classic and TSW. So why should N3V be any different? Those Trainz Plus exclusives will never become available for purchase. That's not an okay practice. That's more like favoritism honestly. They should be available for purchase just like all other dlc. JointedRail's Club Car isn't like that. You subscribe to Club Car, you get access to CC exclusive content, you download it, you get to keep it. CC content may not be purchasable individually like the rest of JR's payware, but you can still keep it. N3V Games should not be locking any dlc behind a subscription. They should be purchasable like all other dlc.

Hi, are you the guy who has raised this (very important) issue over on the Discord and has been relentlessly bullied and abused as a consequence by the more sheep-like members of our community over the last few days? If so, I have to say it is the worse behaviour I've ever seen in 20 years of playing this game and suggests that (as this forum dies, apparently it's no longer even monitored by N3V) the Discord is introducing the worst kind of abusive behaviours that we associate with social media elsewhere. This community was always a friendly and tolerant place where disagreements were usually voiced in a sympathetic manner. On the Discord we see a harsh and cruel tone with people ganging-up on individuals who dare to voice an unpopular opinion.

Regarding the DLC issue - I've registered my views about this over the years. I don't mind subscribing to the game engine (I'm a Plus member), but I do mind not being able to own the rolling stock. Clearly, N3V do not have a proper product life-cycle management policy, so it is not clear when, if ever, models that are behind the Gold paywall will be made available to the rest of the community. It would be easier to accept if the policy applied to 'nice to have' models. N3V's previous penchant for niche models - class 11 anyone? - tended to soften our concerns about where this was all heading. However, increasingly they are keeping critical models behind the subscription paywall - mk1 coaches, HST, class 47, class 08 (to a lesser extend class 40). It is not possible to model UK railways from the 60s to the 90s without these models. Which is why the ownership issue is so sensitive - if you lose the models, you lose your ability to play the game. (It's a strange by-product of this business model that you can buy the game-engine in standalone form, but not the rolling stock to run in it!)

I believe the point has been made before that this approach risks being very divisive and could lead to a two-tier community. When that happens, the people in the 'top tier' are liable to become judgemental and harsh towards anyone who questions this approach, shades of which I think we've seen on the Discord server in the last few days.

What is the way forward on this if we want to heal the divisions? My suggestions:

1. the next version of Trainz to be fully subscription-based on the saas model;
2. end the distinction between Plus and Gold and have one subscription base;
3. introduce a clearly defined product lifecycle management policy that is stated to the community: advanced access for free to Gold members (if it's retained) for X months; then available to buy to other subscribers; then available to buy to non-subscribers after Y months.
4. If (2) is adopted, then DLC is available to buy to subscribers for X months after which it can be bought by the rest of the community using legacy versions of the game (depending on build number). DLC is 'download to own'.

At the very least, promote a discussion about this with the community. My impression (possibly misleading) is that the UK Trainz community are not enthused about key models only being available to Gold members and we do not seem to be seeing a great take up of them (something we saw with their predecessors as well).

 

[pware]

I don't care how many benefits the subscription comes with. What's wrong is wrong. It's favoritism.

Yes it is favouritism and I am fully in favour of it! If an organisation wishes to offer some members benefits or options that are not available to others, not even for a price, then that is their choice. If it attracts new members and brings in more revenue then it serves a useful purpose - and again I am in favour of that. We are going to have to disagree on this point.

Some boring economic analysis:
I don't know how much the Superliner DLC would cost since there is no price shown but lets say $US20 (based on the Rheingold Consist DLC pack price). The Trainz Plus Gold Annual subscription is just under $US130. Just one new Gold subscriber who was attracted by getting the Superliner DLC would bring in more revenue than 6 non-subscribers buying the DLC as a seperate item. The new subscriber may decide to renew their subscription the next year (more revenue) while the DLC purchases would be "one offs" and not repeated by those buyers. I do believe that DLC creators get 50%* of the sale price so only $US10 actually goes to N3V and that would mean 13 non-subscription purchases would be needed to equal the income revenue of just one new subscriber each year.

* before anyone starts a post about how unfair 50% is for all the effort creators have put in, I spent a few decades writing textbooks for a well known international publisher and the maximum I ever got was 11% of the sale price of each book for a minimum of 18 months of work on each.

 

[itstypicalrailfanner]

Hi, are you the guy who has raised this (very important) issue over on the Discord and has been relentlessly bullied and abused as a consequence by the more sheep-like members of our community over the last few days? If so, I have to say it is the worse behaviour I've ever seen in 20 years of playing this game and suggests that (as this forum dies, apparently it's no longer even monitored by N3V) the Discord is introducing the worst kind of abusive behaviours that we associate with social media elsewhere. This community was always a friendly and tolerant place where disagreements were usually voiced in a sympathetic manner. On the Discord we see a harsh and cruel tone with people ganging-up on individuals who dare to voice an unpopular opinion.

Regarding the DLC issue - I've registered my views about this over the years. I don't mind subscribing to the game engine (I'm a Plus member), but I do mind not being able to own the rolling stock. Clearly, N3V do not have a proper product life-cycle management policy, so it is not clear when, if ever, models that are behind the Gold paywall will be made available to the rest of the community. It would be easier to accept if the policy applied to 'nice to have' models. N3V's previous penchant for niche models - class 11 anyone? - tended to soften our concerns about where this was all heading. However, increasingly they are keeping critical models behind the subscription paywall - mk1 coaches, HST, class 47, class 08 (to a lesser extend class 40). It is not possible to model UK railways from the 60s to the 90s without these models. Which is why the ownership issue is so sensitive - if you lose the models, you lose your ability to play the game. (It's a strange by-product of this business model that you can buy the game-engine in standalone form, but not the rolling stock to run in it!)

I believe the point has been made before that this approach risks being very divisive and could lead to a two-tier community. When that happens, the people in the 'top tier' are liable to become judgemental and harsh towards anyone who questions this approach, shades of which I think we've seen on the Discord server in the last few days.

What is the way forward on this if we want to heal the divisions? My suggestions:

1. the next version of Trainz to be fully subscription-based on the saas model;
2. end the distinction between Plus and Gold and have one subscription base;
3. introduce a clearly defined product lifecycle management policy that is stated to the community: advanced access for free to Gold members (if it's retained) for X months; then available to buy to other subscribers; then available to buy to non-subscribers after Y months.
4. If (2) is adopted, then DLC is available to buy to subscribers for X months after which it can be bought by the rest of the community using legacy versions of the game (depending on build number). DLC is 'download to own'.

At the very least, promote a discussion about this with the community. My impression (possibly misleading) is that the UK Trainz community are not enthused about key models only being available to Gold members and we do not seem to be seeing a great take up of them (something we saw with their predecessors as well).

Yeah, I'm the guy who got mocked for actually raising a legitimate concern on discord.
1. I'd have to disagree there. The game shouldn't be subscription based. The last thing that Trainz needs is a subscription-based game that's only rentable.
2. Trainz Plus and Trainz Plus Gold are pretty much the same thing, just different tiers. Honestly, they might as well just have one subscription as it doesn't make sense to even have two. I guess TPS is for those who only want certain things and aren't looking for TPG benefits.
3. Now we're talking.
4. Hell yes!

Considering how stubborn N3V Games are about their decision to keep making Trainz Plus exclusive content, it's highly unlikely they're going to change that unless there's enough uproar about it. Like a discord user said, some things can't be changed. The best that can be done, is let N3V be do whatever they're doing until they piss off most of the Trainz community.

The funny thing is I was looking in the trainz support channel and hilariously came across someone complaining about Trainz Plus being hardly tested due to N3V assuming T+ beta users will report bugs.

"It also means it hardly gets tested because N3V thinks ‘the Trainz+ beta users will report bugs’ except the problem can be different, and much worse on the retail games than it is Trainz+"

Just guess who that reply belongs to. Just guess, lol.

And mind you, that same user throws money at N3V Games for Trainz Plus, acting all high and mighty about it, while shitting on me for not doing the same thing, along with criticizing N3V Games for having Trainz Plus exclusives that we aren't even given the choice to buy.

 

[itstypicalrailfanner]

Yes it is favouritism and I am fully in favour of it! If an organisation wishes to offer some members benefits or options that are not available to others, not even for a price, then that is their choice. If it attracts new members and brings in more revenue then it serves a useful purpose - and again I am in favour of that. We are going to have to disagree on this point.

Some boring economic analysis:
I don't know how much the Superliner DLC would cost since there is no price shown but lets say $US20 (based on the Rheingold Consist DLC pack price). The Trainz Plus Gold Annual subscription is just under $US130. Just one new Gold subscriber who was attracted by getting the Superliner DLC would bring in more revenue than 6 non-subscribers buying the DLC as a seperate item. The new subscriber may decide to renew their subscription the next year (more revenue) while the DLC purchases would be "one offs" and not repeated by those buyers. I do believe that DLC creators get 50%* of the sale price so only $US10 actually goes to N3V and that would mean 13 non-subscription purchases would be needed to equal the income revenue of just one new subscriber each year.

* before anyone starts a post about how unfair 50% is for all the effort creators have put in, I spent a few decades writing textbooks for a well known international publisher and the maximum I ever got was 11% of the sale price of each book for a minimum of 18 months of work on each.

Favoritism is a very bad thing to have and it's not good to support it. It's just not a good practice and it isn't a good look. Also, 50% does seem pretty unfair for the effort that creators do put in. Jointedrail has Clubcar and he doesn't handle his CC content like that, yet he still makes good money. If N3V Games want more money, favoritism isn't the way to go. It's just divisive and even I can see that. You keep saying you understand our concerns, but you're basically telling those who are complaining, that you simply don't care about N3V Games' business practices. I hear the same excuse, the same thing from Trainz users who only care about themselves, not other Trainz users.

If people are not buying Trainz dlc often and are more interested in Trainz Plus, then something's wrong there. Why aren't people buying dlc? That's the question N3V Games should be asking themselves. What would encourage people to by dlc more often? Trainz Plus exclusives may be a solution right now, but they can't rely on Trainz Plus exclusives forever.

 

[pware]

@istypicalraifanner. N3V have been around for a long time, almost 20 years in the business. You may not agree with how they run things or, in particular, their decision to keep some DLC packages for Gold members only - but that is a very common business practice in the real world. Just because you don't like it is no reason why they should change it.

If you want those packages so badly then become a gold member - that is the whole reason behind the strategy.

Clearly no argument based on logic or business experience will change your mind.

Adios

 

[wreeder]

Gold subscribers get 25% discount on all DLC purchased while they have an active subscription. If you purchase while items are on sale then you save 25% off the sale price too. It doesn't take long to save the extra $60 cost of the Gold package.

 

[JCitron]

Favoritism is a very bad thing to have and it's not good to support it. It's just not a good practice and it isn't a good look.

Given how the last beta went, I don't see any favoritism here. We've been given the same load of you know what just like everyone else.

 

[itstypicalrailfanner]

@istypicalraifanner. N3V have been around for a long time, almost 20 years in the business. You may not agree with how they run things or, in particular, their decision to keep some DLC packages for Gold members only - but that is a very common business practice in the real world. Just because you don't like it is no reason why they should change it.

If you want those packages so badly then become a gold member - that is the whole reason behind the strategy.

Clearly no argument based on logic or business experience will change your mind.

Adios

You can argue business all you want. The fact is that it's not really a legitimate excuse. And considering that's the whole reason behind exclusives, that's exactly what I'm talking about. My mind will not be changed, no matter how much you try to call it "business." "It's just business," isn't a valid excuse anymore, it's just ignoring the issue. I'm already a gold member anyway, but this conversation is just proving to me that it's not worth it, no matter how good it is. I want every trainz user to have the option of buying any and all dlc for the game, not be forced to chose between a subscription and being left behind because "business." Your logic is "if it makes money, then I don't see an issue with it," which is the exact kind of mindset that plagues the world today, including the gaming industry.