jacksonbarno
Alco Spoken Here
To N3V and all who may be concerned,
I would like to start by stating that I have enjoyed the Trainz series for most of my life. As an avid railfan and model railroader, Trainz has tugged at my creative side in a way yet unmatched by any other game. Over the years I have been delighted to see how the game has improved and changed, and although in the past I may have been too vocal about some points, I have always generally supported the direction the company has taken, especially given the means with which they have had to develop the franchise. I understand that N3V faces unique challenges, with the Trainz franchise falling within a fairly niche corner of a small segment of the gaming industry. However, it seems to me that the recent pivot in business model has left us at a crossroads regarding the future of the Trainz franchise. Having gauged a variety of opinions, and weighed my own, I feel that it is necessary to at least voice some of the more widespread concerns with the current situation, and potentially leave it to the N3V staff to answer some of the more common pressing questions that have been raised lately. While I do not own Trainz 22, I have been exposed to it in depth and have had the pleasure of being walked through a lot of its improvements in detail. I will preface this by saying that Surveyor 2 looks FANTASTIC and is exactly the improvement Trainz has been needing for a while. However, the way it is being sold by N3V via the Trainz Plus subscription is very concerning.
The current model being trialed with the release of Trainz 22 seems troubling, to say the least. The current subscription model requires the user to pay a yearly fee to access all new features rolled out with the latest release of the game, a price tag at minimum of $70 per year. The base game of TS22 is, in essence, a "content release," meaning the base game has changed very little from the previous version, with the included content being the main differentiating factor. To access the main features of this version of the game, mainly being surveyor 2.0, you must maintain your subscription year on year or you will lose access.
This poses several issues at surface level. The primary one is compatibility - it seems likely that with the new changes between base and Trainz Plus versions of the game, differences in build number may potentially prevent the sharing of routes from the Plus version to the base game. How this will affect other content in the future remains to be seen, but even isolating the issue of sharing routes is a fairly substantial issue, given the improvement with Trainz Plus is Surveyor 2.0. So now (almost certainly unintentionally), N3V has even further diminished the usefulness of the base TS22 without the Plus subscription. If base users can't enjoy routes created by Plus members, then there is less reason for a fence sitting potential customer to upgrade from 19 to 22, especially if they are not interested in the improved surveyor system.
Another issue arises if a user ends their subscription. Theoretically, when the user's subscription ends, they will be locked out of content they have created due to Trainz Plus having a higher build number than the base game. This means that if a user decides to terminate their subscription, they must wait until the next round of updates to the base version of Trainz 22, which N3V has confirmed will happen at a slower rate than Plus builds (to be expected with a service that promises more regular updates and tweaks/features). Depending on the cycle of development, creators may have to wait MONTHS until they can access routes created in TS22 Plus if they either decide they do not want, or can not afford to maintain a Trainz Plus subscription.
The base game of Trainz 22 seems to, in essence, be Trainz 19 with few, if any changes. As previously stated, the main offering is content-based, and while routes like Moffat look great, the game itself seems to have changed very little. Although future changes to the base game may be promised, I believe we have very little evidence to suggest that any real changes will happen. TS12 and T:ANE received no major additions after launch aside from fixes (which are always appreciated, but that's beside the point), and TS19 was seemingly only granted MPS as a trial for its implementation in Trainz 22.
If Trainz 22 were to receive some improvements over the base version of Trainz 19 (aside from Surveyor 2) that were promised as far back as T:ANE, such as improved weather, an improved skybox, or even implementation of things like three way switches and diamonds, I would feel differently. But minor environmental tweaks and completely messing up the error system do not seem to be the major improvements to the sim that push me to spend $70 on a new game. Previous versions of the game were different enough at their core that they were a marked improvement over the previous version: TS12 had an improved sound system, T:ANE added a TON of new features including improved environments, track mechanics, and other changes. TS19 added PBR textures and further improved the environment. TS22 seems to bring nothing new to the table without paying a yearly subscription.
Personally, I look at these sort of things from a cost/benefit perspective - is the cost of Trainz 22 and the subscription every year worth the improved surveyor mechanic? Especially taking into account the compatibility issues I honestly feel that the implementation makes the upgrade more trouble than it is worth, especially when accounting for the hassle of transitioning to the new game, dealing with the game's teething troubles (which every game has, not faulting N3V for this), and fixing the assets that the new error system has broken.
The shift to a subscription model in and of itself is worrying to me. Subscription based models are widely accepted as an extremely predatory business practice in the gaming industry, and even though several other companies have adopted them successfully, it does not mean that N3V should. This company has always been community, creator, and customer driven, and N3V has always been supportive of and reasonable with its users. A change away from this would not only harm something that makes the company so great, but would also further divide a community that already seems to resist upgrading to a new game.
If the core issue is financial, and if the move to a subscription is out of necessity, then I wish the company would be more transparent. I would almost rather donate money to support the company than see a move towards a predatory system that under-delivers and overcharges. There are other ways to generate cashflow, and I have full confidence that the community as a whole will be willing to work out a solution with the company to generate the support necessary to improve the stability of the company and the franchise. If the core issue is adopting a model that other companies have used to great success, I have more than a few moral issues with the decision-making and direction that the gaming industry has taken, and those would certainly not differ in this case. Either way, if N3V feels that this system is successful, I have a feeling it will be here to stay, and that is bad for all users of this sim.
With that said, I hope this letter is taken with the best intent in mind. I look forward to tackling these issues as a community, and coming to a resolution that benefits both the end user and N3V, and further improves the Trainz franchise as a whole. This is by far the best train simulator on the market, and the community is one of the strongest. Let's prevent N3V and Trainz from making the same mistakes as other, much less highly regarded companies, and move together towards a much brighter future.
All the best,
J
Appendix 1: Another side concern regarding 22 and Trainz Plus that I have is the compatibility of packaged and payware versions of assets that exist in some form as freeware. In my experience, a large number of route builders have been forced to deal with infuriating situations where users have all of the dependencies for a route, but because one or the other does not possess the "payware" or "packaged" version of a dependency, the route refuses to load it. Adding another tier to Trainz with another level of content further complicates this issue, and reduces the utility of assets included in the subscription. I've floated a suggestion of allowing the game to use a lower version of a scenery asset on routes in order to bypass this issue in the past, but I would be interested to hear what N3V's opinion is of this problem. This isn't directly related to the above letter, but it's tangentially related so I figure I would also raise it here as well.
Appendix 2: Another point I would like to make is that even when changes seem to be made, the documentation and instructions on how to properly use those changes ranges from spotty to nonexistent, and as H222 said, to say the wiki is incomplete is an understatement. It seems to me that the lack of documentation is a huge factor in holding these new game versions back, as the changes to base functions are relatively useless if users need to figure out how to properly use them on their own.
Appendix 3: The scrapbook tool in Surveyor 2 is a fantastic utility that is incredibly useful, but one major issue I can foresee in its implementation is that people can steal whole scenes or sections of routes for use in their own projects without permission. Does N3V have a strategy to combat this drawback?
I would like to start by stating that I have enjoyed the Trainz series for most of my life. As an avid railfan and model railroader, Trainz has tugged at my creative side in a way yet unmatched by any other game. Over the years I have been delighted to see how the game has improved and changed, and although in the past I may have been too vocal about some points, I have always generally supported the direction the company has taken, especially given the means with which they have had to develop the franchise. I understand that N3V faces unique challenges, with the Trainz franchise falling within a fairly niche corner of a small segment of the gaming industry. However, it seems to me that the recent pivot in business model has left us at a crossroads regarding the future of the Trainz franchise. Having gauged a variety of opinions, and weighed my own, I feel that it is necessary to at least voice some of the more widespread concerns with the current situation, and potentially leave it to the N3V staff to answer some of the more common pressing questions that have been raised lately. While I do not own Trainz 22, I have been exposed to it in depth and have had the pleasure of being walked through a lot of its improvements in detail. I will preface this by saying that Surveyor 2 looks FANTASTIC and is exactly the improvement Trainz has been needing for a while. However, the way it is being sold by N3V via the Trainz Plus subscription is very concerning.
The current model being trialed with the release of Trainz 22 seems troubling, to say the least. The current subscription model requires the user to pay a yearly fee to access all new features rolled out with the latest release of the game, a price tag at minimum of $70 per year. The base game of TS22 is, in essence, a "content release," meaning the base game has changed very little from the previous version, with the included content being the main differentiating factor. To access the main features of this version of the game, mainly being surveyor 2.0, you must maintain your subscription year on year or you will lose access.
This poses several issues at surface level. The primary one is compatibility - it seems likely that with the new changes between base and Trainz Plus versions of the game, differences in build number may potentially prevent the sharing of routes from the Plus version to the base game. How this will affect other content in the future remains to be seen, but even isolating the issue of sharing routes is a fairly substantial issue, given the improvement with Trainz Plus is Surveyor 2.0. So now (almost certainly unintentionally), N3V has even further diminished the usefulness of the base TS22 without the Plus subscription. If base users can't enjoy routes created by Plus members, then there is less reason for a fence sitting potential customer to upgrade from 19 to 22, especially if they are not interested in the improved surveyor system.
Another issue arises if a user ends their subscription. Theoretically, when the user's subscription ends, they will be locked out of content they have created due to Trainz Plus having a higher build number than the base game. This means that if a user decides to terminate their subscription, they must wait until the next round of updates to the base version of Trainz 22, which N3V has confirmed will happen at a slower rate than Plus builds (to be expected with a service that promises more regular updates and tweaks/features). Depending on the cycle of development, creators may have to wait MONTHS until they can access routes created in TS22 Plus if they either decide they do not want, or can not afford to maintain a Trainz Plus subscription.
The base game of Trainz 22 seems to, in essence, be Trainz 19 with few, if any changes. As previously stated, the main offering is content-based, and while routes like Moffat look great, the game itself seems to have changed very little. Although future changes to the base game may be promised, I believe we have very little evidence to suggest that any real changes will happen. TS12 and T:ANE received no major additions after launch aside from fixes (which are always appreciated, but that's beside the point), and TS19 was seemingly only granted MPS as a trial for its implementation in Trainz 22.
If Trainz 22 were to receive some improvements over the base version of Trainz 19 (aside from Surveyor 2) that were promised as far back as T:ANE, such as improved weather, an improved skybox, or even implementation of things like three way switches and diamonds, I would feel differently. But minor environmental tweaks and completely messing up the error system do not seem to be the major improvements to the sim that push me to spend $70 on a new game. Previous versions of the game were different enough at their core that they were a marked improvement over the previous version: TS12 had an improved sound system, T:ANE added a TON of new features including improved environments, track mechanics, and other changes. TS19 added PBR textures and further improved the environment. TS22 seems to bring nothing new to the table without paying a yearly subscription.
Personally, I look at these sort of things from a cost/benefit perspective - is the cost of Trainz 22 and the subscription every year worth the improved surveyor mechanic? Especially taking into account the compatibility issues I honestly feel that the implementation makes the upgrade more trouble than it is worth, especially when accounting for the hassle of transitioning to the new game, dealing with the game's teething troubles (which every game has, not faulting N3V for this), and fixing the assets that the new error system has broken.
The shift to a subscription model in and of itself is worrying to me. Subscription based models are widely accepted as an extremely predatory business practice in the gaming industry, and even though several other companies have adopted them successfully, it does not mean that N3V should. This company has always been community, creator, and customer driven, and N3V has always been supportive of and reasonable with its users. A change away from this would not only harm something that makes the company so great, but would also further divide a community that already seems to resist upgrading to a new game.
If the core issue is financial, and if the move to a subscription is out of necessity, then I wish the company would be more transparent. I would almost rather donate money to support the company than see a move towards a predatory system that under-delivers and overcharges. There are other ways to generate cashflow, and I have full confidence that the community as a whole will be willing to work out a solution with the company to generate the support necessary to improve the stability of the company and the franchise. If the core issue is adopting a model that other companies have used to great success, I have more than a few moral issues with the decision-making and direction that the gaming industry has taken, and those would certainly not differ in this case. Either way, if N3V feels that this system is successful, I have a feeling it will be here to stay, and that is bad for all users of this sim.
With that said, I hope this letter is taken with the best intent in mind. I look forward to tackling these issues as a community, and coming to a resolution that benefits both the end user and N3V, and further improves the Trainz franchise as a whole. This is by far the best train simulator on the market, and the community is one of the strongest. Let's prevent N3V and Trainz from making the same mistakes as other, much less highly regarded companies, and move together towards a much brighter future.
All the best,
J
Appendix 1: Another side concern regarding 22 and Trainz Plus that I have is the compatibility of packaged and payware versions of assets that exist in some form as freeware. In my experience, a large number of route builders have been forced to deal with infuriating situations where users have all of the dependencies for a route, but because one or the other does not possess the "payware" or "packaged" version of a dependency, the route refuses to load it. Adding another tier to Trainz with another level of content further complicates this issue, and reduces the utility of assets included in the subscription. I've floated a suggestion of allowing the game to use a lower version of a scenery asset on routes in order to bypass this issue in the past, but I would be interested to hear what N3V's opinion is of this problem. This isn't directly related to the above letter, but it's tangentially related so I figure I would also raise it here as well.
Appendix 2: Another point I would like to make is that even when changes seem to be made, the documentation and instructions on how to properly use those changes ranges from spotty to nonexistent, and as H222 said, to say the wiki is incomplete is an understatement. It seems to me that the lack of documentation is a huge factor in holding these new game versions back, as the changes to base functions are relatively useless if users need to figure out how to properly use them on their own.
Appendix 3: The scrapbook tool in Surveyor 2 is a fantastic utility that is incredibly useful, but one major issue I can foresee in its implementation is that people can steal whole scenes or sections of routes for use in their own projects without permission. Does N3V have a strategy to combat this drawback?
Last edited: