Train Simulator 2016 And How We've Reached The Crest Of The Dumb DLC Wave
from the dlc-all-that-money dept
We only occasionally talk about video game DLC, or downloadable content, here at Techdirt. When digital distribution became a thing some years back, game makers came up with DLC as a way to achieve several goals: extend the shelf-life of games, make games more saleable through the promise of extra content, and, of course, make more money. I remember when the wave of DLC started and the general negative reaction brought by the gaming public to it. Most concerns centered around game makers charging for features that once were included in the games for the original asking price. Some makers legitimized these concerns through their actions, but others did wonderful things with DLC that gamers would not wish to be without. But, as Hunter S. Thompson once imagined he could see the crest of hippie culture along the Rocky Mountains before its eventual recession, I too can see the crest of DLC greed in our time in the insanity of Train Simulator 2016's laughable DLC offerings.
This all becomes evident as Kotaku's Alex Walker went on a quest to find the most ridiculous DLC costs for games on the market today.
My first thought was the Dynasty Warriors series. They, like many anime brawlers, have an absurd amount of costume and armour packages that are far more expensive than they should be. But then I came across Train Simulator 2016: Steam Edition. It’s US$45, which is fairly standard for niche titles with a hardcore fanbase. Dovetail Games were even generous enough to have a special on the DLC. And then I saw how much DLC there was.
As you can see at the bottom of the image, there are 230 available DLC options for sale. Next to it is an option to see them all. Walker saw them all. The results, and keep in mind that most of these are on sale for nearly half off, are hilariously expensive.
Yes, that's over $3,000 if you were to buy all of the game's DLC when most of it is on sale. None of this is to say, of course, that a game maker can't charge what they like for their game, their DLC, their box art, their communications, their support, or anything else. They most certainly can. But what this should herald for most of us is the ultimate example of DLC done wrong. Whatever costs and effort might go into making a game, the end result shouldn't be the cost of a used car in payment for the full content. There are ways to DLC right and it's not evil to charge for great content, but this kind of thing we see above is so far removed from how games were charged for only a few years ago that it's plainly obvious that something ain't right here.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: business models, content, dlc, downloadable content, train simulator, train simulator 2016, video games
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Truthiness.
I think we can agree that someone who will charge over $3000 for what amounts to 'train armor' DLC probably doesn't deserve that consumer base, true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Truthiness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Truthiness.
As I believe Techdirt's brought up before, even if the initial investment was pretty tricky (modeling time, animation time, examining real-world versions for detail accuracy), once that's done, the price of creating a new copy of the digital good is negligible, if not $0. There's no way they can justify $3000 worth of DLC (most of it at -40% on sale) for what amounts to skins, apart from "We figured people would pay that much, and we like money." Which is business-reasonable, but nasty and greedy. TD's just callin' it like it sees it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
No, they're buying manufactured physical goods with relatively high marginal costs due to the demanded quality of the product and small market.
Now, I don't know the actual cost of developing one of these DLC packages (Will above seems to be assuming it's small,l others seem to believe it's much trickier), but the digital download version does not have those marginal manufacturing costs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
Both essentially copy a design but the "Horse Armour" design had to be created by the studio first where as the train design was either photographed or pulled from a book which I would assume has a hell of a lot less man hours involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
Do you:
A. Buy every skin for every hero ever.
B. Buy skins for specific characters you use that you think look cool.
How about this instead? You're playing a game and you obtain a very rare item that almost no one has. Lots of people then start to contact you asking to trade that item for real world money.
People spend HUNDREDS of not THOUSANDS of dollars on virtual things all the time. Lots of times those digital objects aren't even being sold as DLC or otherwise. People pay others to farm gold in an MMO. Hell, people are paying money for ships in a game that hasn't even been released yet (Star Citizen). People have hobbies, and sometimes those people are willing to spend ludicrous amounts of money for their hobbies. That doesn't mean however that they're going to go shopping for food and buy the store. Basically, if DLC doesn't effect the base game there's no need to buy it. If there's no need to buy it then people won't unless they want to. If people don't want to buy DLC that doesn't effect the base game then they won't.
Wingracer on the Kotaku Article said it best:
"Exactly. This is like an article titled “This hobby shop sells a million dollar train set” when in fact the only way to spend a million dollars there is if you bought one of every single variety of train piece available on the market."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
A. Buy every skin for every hero ever.
B. Buy skins for specific characters you use that you think look cool."
Personally? I would go with C. Buy no skins whatsoever. But that's just because I have other things to spend my money on that actually make a difference in my life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Truthiness.
Why would anyone take that site seriously after all the crap that they did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
say, how many DLCs do you plan on splitting it into?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"They should just lose money so we get things for free"
Attack that strawman!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If it is that expensive to recreate an Intercity Class 91 Loco (20 quid a pop), you may be making a graver error than selling it...
While I don't mind vanity DLCs or DLCs in general, the pricing for these trains seems far too peppered compared to the content.
Be aware that the base game is about 44 quid, but if you want a relatively lifelike experience you would need at least 1 train a 20 quid and a rail route a 40 quid. That is 100 for an immersive experience with 1 train and 1 route, where the DLCs costs already surpass the games cost. The rest is about 2900 for the current package on sale. Since a new game is released every year, it seems like a slightly expensive hobby.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I seriously doubt that. People who collect model trains want the actual, physical model trains. They may also enjoy a virtual representation of the same trains and they may not -- but the two things are not competing with each other at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
True, but the cost of rare physical objects is completely irrelevant in a discussion about the cost of infinitely reproducible digital files.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The DLC usually adds several features such as scenarios (missions), liveries etc, and there is tons of free stuff available if you look around - some of it very high quality. The chances anyone would want to buy all the DLC is quite slim as each download provides quite a few hours gameplay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Maybe this particular game comes with numerous routes and trains but I saw a package on the shelf at a local store a few years ago priced at US $60.00 with exactly three locos and three routes, and the locos/routes were paired: you could not use one loco on a different route. The package did say that additional routes and locos could be downloaded, but said nothing about if there was going to be an additional cost. Needless to say I didn't buy it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Oct 5th, 2015 @ 11:45pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
In any respect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This pile of crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
*gets run over by a train*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
None of the players will buy all of those, i doubth they have more than a dozen buyers for some of those.
So i would guess they have to keep the prices high to make some money.
But then, those dlc's arent as detailed as some third-party ones, so if someone is really into trains they will buy the most detailed thing they can find, and there are a few ones where starting the train takes over 200 clicks and 10 minutes...
So yes, its a ripoff. Their quality is not worth that price and according to the steam discussions, there are dozens of issues that havent been fixed since the first version of this game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Except you're forgetting basic economics. If they were to drop the price of the DLC to, say, a tenth of what it is right now, then maybe instead of getting a dozen buyers, they might get hundreds. 20 or 30 times as many sales at a tenth the profit each is still 2 or 3 times the profit.
Now I'm not saying this is exactly what would happen; simulator folk aren't known for their frugality. However, I figure they're currently only buying packs at the top of their list instead of the top ten things on their list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Maybe people would buy a 2-3 more but the point is, they buy a train because they like it and they are rarely intrested in other trains.
Also, as weird as it is, spending 20$ on a dlc makes it more enjoyable than getting it for 2$.
I agree that dropping the price usally increases sales but in this game, people are intrested in very specific things so they ignore everything else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
"Also, as weird as it is, spending 20$ on a dlc makes it more enjoyable than getting it for 2$. "
I don't understand that comment. Unless you're just talking about the knowledge that you're directly funding the developer and their next iteration of the game, why is it more "enjoyable" to drop 10x the price for something?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There's a flaw with this calculation. Although you're correct that a vendor would get more customers if he lowered the price, he now has to deal with questions and issues from more customers.
I don't mean to sound elitist, many markets have price levels which are geared to newbies and experts.
For example, Alienware prices their computers to experts and they don't expect to get customer support calls from people who think the DVD tray is a cup holder.
By comparison, by selling digital trains for $20, the vendors are appealing to collectors who know what they're getting into. If the vendor priced the same train for $1.99, he might be spending more of his time trying to help people who may not even know how to get the models into the train simulation game and who may have bought only because the price was cheap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: upgrades
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Nerve!
Sounds like someone's wants to be a train hoarder. Are you REALLY going to play with 230 different virtual trains in your lifetime? ADHD, are we?
The again, are they one-use combustible and destructible? If so, I could maybe see smashing engines together 115 times. Are virtual Firemen an additional charge?
"What do you mean Pro FootBall '98 doesn't include the current '15 lineup? And where are all of the little league teams, anyway?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Nerve!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Costs do come down after a year or so, if you know where to buy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Dumb
Much of it is freely shared by those who make the add-ons.
But this only encourages more people to join in, and has led to a large and successful market for paid add-ons. This was all blessed by Microsoft, with an SDK for developers.
That market is still going strong despite the last version being Flight Simulator X back in 2006.
Flight Simulator 2 - released on a floppy in 1983 - had crude but location-accurate runways all over the world. The world's airports and scenery improved with every release. With Microsoft now having an internet-connected global database of high resolution scenery and buildings for Bing Maps, the next version of Flight Simulator was obviously going to be amazing even without add-on scenery.
Instead, in 2012 Microsoft released Microsoft Flight. None of the old add-ons worked. The only scenery: The Big Island of Hawaii. JUST the Big Island of Hawaii. Only one aircraft. (Plus the incomplete Stearman - no cockpit view.) The program made it clear that it was all about Paid Downloadable Content.
The only downloadable scenery - released months later: More Hawaiian islands and then part of Alaska. That's it. That's all. And some unfinished aircraft. External view only. No cockpit views.
Apparently Microsoft had approached many of those producing Flight Simulator add-ons, "offered" to let them develop add-ons for Flight. That is, they dictated policy with very restrictive and one-sided terms. And the developers all stayed with Flight Simulator X.
Nor would people spend money on it. Not without their local scenery and airports, or the aircraft they might fly in real life, or the aircraft they dreamed of flying.
And so Microsoft Flight is dead. Flight Simulator X and its add-on market lives on. There's even a new revision: 2006's Flight Simulator X recompiled in newer tools to work better on newer Windows versions. Produced by Dovetail Games, maker of the above-mentioned Train Simulator.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rather, it's a reasonable price basic starter with reasonably priced and very specific adds ons for people to customize the simulator based on what they want to do. This appears to be the best way to address the marketplace and make it economically viable to produce all of these add ons.
It seems like a perfectly reasonable business strategy that also meets the desires of the players of the simulator.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I would agree....As long as that is made clear before the purchase of the game. So when you go to purchase the game, if the add-ons show below the main title and the consumer can clearly see that they are not included, as well as exactly what those additional add-ons will cost after the fact, then fine.
The good news is; If they released a bunch of add-ons that should have clearly been in the game in the first place, the consumer will punish the game company. They will either not buy from that studio again, or they will just pirate the game. Either way the market will sort itself out in short order.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But, I also agree that this is DLC taken to its most ridiculous extreme, and it's not something that most gamers would wish to see anywhere near the titles they usually play.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's get the obvious out of the way. DLC != micro-transactions. I believe this is a common understanding.
DLC is used by publishers because "Micro Transactions" on a menu isn't going to be well received.
Now that we've clarified this, let's move on.
These locomotives aren't DLC. They're micro-transactions. Individually, they're on par with other things I've seen in games offering micro-transactions.
Often referred to as "horse armor" (after Bethesda charged people $5 for a visual change to the in-game horse that did nothing else), gamers have learned the difference and quickly voice their opinion when the offering(s) are priced foolishly, if not stupidly.
This game is offering additional locos which doesn't have any impact on the game other than a visual change from the game's base engine.
The pricing makes sense, when you realize it's not designed to allow a single player to download every loco, but rather, allow them a few options if they choose to want them.
If you think these prices are outrages, then head over to ZoS' Crown Store, where a single motif will cost people $49.99 in real, cold cash if they can't wait to find it in the game.
Outrageous? That all depends on one's definition of value.
You see, I've purchased quite a few things from the Crown Store because I don't look at the item as being "$25".
Instead, I look at it this way: "$25 to support this game I'm having a blast with, and look, they're giving me a lioness for free!"
ZoS doesn't require a subscription to play the game (it used to for PC players, but this was lifted when the console versions were released).
Thus, one has to ask: does value mean bitching about a few optional micro-transactions to earn revenue to keep several servers online so people can play the game or does value mean an entitled gamer is supposed to own everything the game offers for little to no cost while expecting companies to earn revenue selling.... t-shirts?
There's only one logical choice in the above, that is, unless you're Tim or Alex, who can't tell the difference between DLC and micro-transactions.
If you want clarification on this, I suggest hitting up on the latest gaming news where the headlines are shouting how Destiny is going to offer micro-transactions in its game.
I find it rather comical none of these titles are calling the new items "DLC".
Is that how this "DLC" game works, writers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
DLC = downloadable content, usually downloaded separately from the game to add features or cosmetic additions to a game that cannot normally be accessed by other methods.
Microtransactions - usually small payments, often used by freemium games to speed things up, unlock items without waiting or otherwise access things that can be unlocked during normal gameplay with a non-monetary payment such as time or social features.
With what you've described in the crown store (a single motif will cost people $49.99 in real, cold cash if they can't wait to find it in the game) is a microtransaction since it's getting quick access to something that would normally need gameplay time - although I'd take umbrage with the "micro" part of that statement.
With things like the horse armour and the trains, they're DLC, since they're in addition to the normal game and cannot be unlocked during normal gameplay (as is my understanding).
Stop me if I'm wrong, but I can't see any reason why the description in the article is not accurate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Looks to me like a few of the add-on's are actually train routs and other "assets", not just trains. Also (based on reading a few forum posts); I don't think they are just skin's. Each locomotive has different power and handling ratings no? That would be like getting a better/faster (whatever) horse, not just a skin change?
IMO; a micro transaction is a skin or power up, a DLC would be new areas and or objects.
IMO This clearly fits into the DLC category.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The power ratings are taken from the actual specs of the real locomotive. In addition, they don't have any relevance to the game (which is more a simulator than a game).
The items you can make for the game are, for the most part, skins. Just bytes and bits of digital code rendered by the base.
"DLC" is a synonymous term for "micro-transaction", though it seems fair there is a difference when it comes to detailing what the offerings are.
I see the new layouts as DLC while I see the locos as being micro-transactions.
The DLC allows players to take what the game gives them and expands it. There's no requirement the locos are necessary to play on them.
Again, this is just the way I see gamers call the offerings.
Not that I care in any way.
The reality of the situation is this: you can either buy it or complain about it.
If people don't buy the over-priced goods, then it sends a message back saying "Huh. Let's try a different price."
We'll definitely see this with Destiny, people will "throw money at the screen" because value > price.
Truth be told: shouldn't all digital goods be no cost? Economics say so!
;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Then, erm, why the long post telling the authors of the article off for using the wrong term?
"The DLC allows players to take what the game gives them and expands it. There's no requirement the locos are necessary to play on them."
It's not necessary to download most DLC to play the game, especially cosmetic DLC. Many modern games have a mixture of functional and cosmetic DLC, but they're still referred to as DLC.
"Truth be told: shouldn't all digital goods be no cost? Economics say so!"
Nope, but hopefully the smiley at the end shows that you know this!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In case you missed it The steam store has all these "microtransactions" as you called them under the heading of downloadable content for this game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Are they downloadable? Yep.
Are they content? Yep?
Doesn't that then make them downloadable content? Of course it does!
You don't get to change the meaning of words to suit your own needs.
Calling these micro-transactions is actually far less accurate, since 'micro' means small, and is generally used to mean very small. The whole point here is that the price of these DLC items can't legitimately be described as very small, and in fact are grossly high for the value provided.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmmm
I can just about swallow the prices of the routes, assuming they are accurate with lots of custom objects and not just the same generic row of shops as the last station we passed through.
But $12 for a BR Class 20? Unless all those doors along the body side can be opened and the engine is fully modelled inside I can't see how it takes all that much work to model. I've bought payware locomotives before but they were highly detailed LMS steam engines and they didn't cost that much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Deja Vu
Back in 2013, Train Simulator developer RailSimulator.com (Dovetail Games, under its previous name) had this to say:
I don't own the game (I'm not a train fan), but some commenters on Kotaku have indicated that the DLC are more substantial than just a minor reskin, but are properly modelled to each trains characteristics and control requirements and have their own specialised missions.
The DLC library has apparently been building up over successive releases for years, which is why there's so much of it. Judging by the games Steam discussions, the DLC apparently carries over from the previous versions - if a player bought some for the 2013 game, it can be used with this years release.
I think the DLC could probably be cheaper, but it is extremely niche DLC for a very niche game - and the playerbase seems to have voted positively with their wallets, or the developer presumably wouldn't still be releasing it this way.
If the business model works for them and it works for their customers, then I don't see a problem. Both Techdirt and Kotaku seem to me to be engaging in what I can only describe as nothing more than nerd-shaming, which is frankly cheap, lazy and unjust.
Techdirt and Tim Geigner, it might be a slow news day, but surely you can do better than this.
Kotakus 2013 article: http://kotaku.com/to-buy-all-of-this-games-dlc-youll-need-over-2-000-1412153921
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Deja Vu
I disagree. If people are coming to this from the side of being gamers, then everything in the article is a very valid and a just concern. We're already being nickel and dimed or forced to buy premium content that 10 years ago would have been included in the standard game. We certainly don't want this kind of model to become standard.
Having said that, this appear to be a culture clash where the kinds of people who would normally use a physical trainset (the target demographic here) and people who would normally play other videogames have very different mindsets. Gamers will tend to be completest, while those who use model train will tend to pick and choose what's best for them. In this case, they just happen to have passed across each other by virtue of both using Steam, and the completists will naturally be shocked at what they'd assume would be targeted at the kind of person who usually buys from Steam..
It's possible they're wrong here, but don't accuse them of something when there's a much simpler answer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Deja Vu
The article's premise, "Yes, that's over $3,000 if you were to buy all of the game's DLC when most of it is on sale", is utterly ridiculous. No-one is buying all the DLC. No-one is interested in buying all the DLC.
This ain't Destiny, fantasy weapons on fantasy planets. People are buying replicas of real-world planes/trains and real-world scenery. They're buying the trains and scenery that they encounter in real life in their local area, with much less interest in what's elsewhere.
You claim that "We're already being nickel and dimed or forced to buy premium content that 10 years ago would have been included in the standard game." This is the company that's been updating Microsoft's Flight Simulator X. 10 and even 20 years ago, this is exactly what people were doing. The market for Flight Simulator add-on scenery and aircraft was already around. Like with Train Simulator, some of it paid, and some of it free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Deja Vu
Shaming is in itself shameful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Deja Vu
No it doesn't, that's just your anti-Techdirt bias inventing a strawman argument.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Deja Vu
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Deja Vu
Hence me point about it being a culture clash between 2 differing mindsets.
"You claim that "We're already being nickel and dimed or forced to buy premium content that 10 years ago would have been included in the standard game." This is the company that's been updating Microsoft's Flight Simulator X. 10 and even 20 years ago, this is exactly what people were doing."
Indeed. But again you miss my point. This mindset might be fine for a niche product that's operating on a different business model. It's less acceptable for "normal" videogames. We've see this behaviour creeping in slowly over that time period, and we don't want people pushing things further over to that model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Deja Vu
Flight Simulator and Train Simulator demonstrate DLC done right. Deliver a FULL-FEATURED game, and then have DLC for people who want customization. In the case of both simulators, local scenery, local airports, local airlines and railways.
Microsoft Flight (as opposed to Flight Simulator) shows the opposite. A stripped down to bare bones game, little more than a demo, and everything else as DLC. And then the DLC being unfinished products where it existed at all. A bigger train wreck than anything in Train Simulator.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Deja Vu
Casual players aren't supposed to buy any of it and no-one is expected to buy all of it.
We could argue that they could have included earlier DLC as free content in later games, but that's not the business model - and if some or all of this has been licensed from third parties, they may not have the rights to do that anyway.
This is the standard way to release new content for this game and has been for over half a decade. The developers and the market all seem happy enough to continue. Any complaints on this front seem untimely and unreasonable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is worth pointing out..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
£3.29 for a file that's a little over 4GB wasn't too bad.
These train mods can't be anything more than 20MB or so.
This is greed, pure and simple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ends up that the only vehicle is for Geigner's alcohol-fueled rant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This Is About Developing A Skill.
Then there is model railroading, which is about building stuff in miniature. You get the most points for building stuff from scratch, with an exacto knife, needle files, etc., not from kits. Many years ago, when I was in engineering school, I took a course in projective geometry, that is, applied euclidean geometry. The "term paper" was to build a figure in construction paper: a 6" dome, with a 3" 90-degree elbow coming off the top, and transitioning to a 6" prism section, with the centerline along the bottom of the elbow bend's cylindrical section. Then we were to transition the prism section to a cylindrical section, 3" in diameter, along the same centerline as the prism, and to intersect this with a vertical cone, I think about 10" high. So I made the thing, showed it to the instructor who verbally examined me on the work, and got my grade. Afterwards, I showed it to my father, and he immediately claimed it for his model railroad layout. He had one of these big layouts which ran all over the basement, behind the furnace, etc.
A piece of sheet music is not the same thing as a phonograph record or a CD. I had a rather strange experience recently. A young co-ed told me that she was an enthusiast of music. So I naturally asked what instrument she played. It turned out that she merely meant listening to CD's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What was that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kotaku's Alex Walker went on a quest to find...
you can keep your opinions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is a bargain !
Seriously, if you drop the Steam promotion the whole collection would cost 5000+ $ ... Given that you can actually buy a real used locomotive by 25.000$, it seems a tad excessive , I guess .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not horse armor
Seriously, each of the trains I tried required sitting through a good 30 minutes of tutorials just to know how that specific engine worked. And then another 5-10 minutes if that engine was operating in a region whose signaling rules were different than I was accustomed to.
There is an optional overlay that can provide generic controls for anyone that just wants to play around, but if I'm going to spend the afternoon pretending to be an 1850's era steam locomotive engineer running a passenger service though the lower UK, then by God I should know which of these shiny brass levers drives which cylinder cock, that I need to fuss continually to keep the Johnson bar positioned for peak efficiency, and that my score will suffer severely if I jostle my passengers so violently that their tea sloshes over the brim and stains their petticoats.
My point is that railroad folk enthusiasts generally have ridiculously high expectations, and are often quite willing to pay for them to be met. I'm sorry the companies which cater to your personal interests have been screwing you over lately (the horse armor thing really is disgraceful), but so far as I can tell this is not what is happening here.
TLDR: Train Simulator is not a game. It's a product that happens to be sold on Steam that targets a very specific user base who is unnaturally obsessed with trains, and is willing to pay top dollar for every bit of extra precision they can get their hands on. I paid almost $500 for an authentic 1920's era conductor's hat that sits on a shelf in my den. $3000 for potentially *thousands* of hours of extra content I can actually engage with is a bargain.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
League?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To those saying you aren't forced to buy...
What we're saying is that these prices are absurd for graphics in a video game. Not for real life train models, which is something people keep bringing up, and which each have their own marginal cost and real, physical materials to use - for graphics in a video game, 1s and 0s.
Also, nobody said that anyone had to buy every single piece of DLC in order to enjoy the game. We're pointing out the "over $3000 worth of downloadable content" because it's a number that's mentally shocking, but the reality is, $20 per suit-of-train-armor is already ridiculous, and that's the real objection.
As for the "forced to buy" argument, the entire psychology behind DLC content is premised around A) reducing the price of individual purchases to make the person FEEL like they're spending less, and B) creating a "has" and "has-not" situation to try to manipulate people into buying.
Perhaps this situation is perfectly innocuous - perhaps the developer is simply churning out a-la-carte options for people to select between to customize their experience, like they suggest. The reason several people - including yours truly - call foul at this (besides the idea of spending $20 per train, or $12 if you catch it on sale, either number being patently ridiculous for a tiny graphics package) is because this is a symptom of a culture that we see invading our hobby and poisoning it, AAA full-priced games cutting out content to reserve as DLC later in the game's lifecycle to pump us for more money. Along with in-game microtransactions, we feel victimized (especially people, like myself, who DO have an addictive / compulsive mindset and end up spending tons of money on a game, only to realize how much we've blown on it later and end up eating ramen for a week - there's your vaunted "whales") by people who just want to wring our wallets for all they're worth. And so there's a kickback, and a strong one, when we see something like this.
I'm finding it tricky to find a full list of features that you get with TS2016 on purchase, pre-DLC, so if someone can fill us in on that, we can have a good hard look at whether the game offers enough up-front to be worth the initial price, which tends to be a telling point for the intentions of the offered DLC... but no amount of false equivalence, begging the question, or outright dismissal of concerns is going to convince me that it's okay to charge $20 for train armor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: To those saying you aren't forced to buy...
First, it's NOT your hobby. It's mine. If giving them more of my money is what motivates them to keep adding ridiculous amounts of content, then more of my money they shall receive!
Second, your "tiny graphics package" comment tells me you have no idea what you're talking about. Every engine ever made in history has had individual quirks and oddities. Drive two sister trains cross country and you realize just how much personality they have (which isn't really such a good thing in the real world for those that actually have a job to do...)
The point is that the DLC in this case isn't just a texture pack. Every new cab has to replicate the unique control system for that engine, which requires an artist to model the cab, a photographer to go shoot all the knobs, buttons, switches, levers and other such mechanical apparatus in multiple angles, and most importantly, for them to do whatever they do that manages to parameterize the simulation model to capture the distinct personalities of each engine.
Could they do more? Sure. My personal pet peeve is that you can't zoom in enough on the brassworks in the K1 cabs to be able to read the etched in part numbers. Admittedly in real life these are unreadable from further than a few inches away, and even then you have to have the light at the right angle,but surely they could have used something akin to gigapixel imagery of the cabin to achieve effectively infinite zoom. I happen to own vintage engineering notebooks with exploded views of the cab and other components, and would love to be able to simulate an engineer bending down to get the correct number, then flipping to the relevant diagram in order to diagnose some obscure problem.
On the other hand, for $20 my satisfaction in experiencing the thrill of conducting a K1 is now limited only by being unable to read tiny part numbers. And if I lobby hard enough maybe they'll add a second tier DLC package that adds gigapixel-ish textures. I'd pay another $20 for that, easy.
It is a good time to be a train enthusiast.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Concession
I'm still not convinced that such a piece of DLC would be worth the amount they're asking for it, but I'm willing to concede that perhaps it is in absolute terms (I.E. compared to the effort it makes to develop the DLC), and that it's clearly worth it in subjective terms to some folks running the simulator, such as yourself.
So, it's a fair cop, guv. Pardon me if I offended! I hope you can understand where those of us in the gaming space would see prices like this in the simulation space and assume corporate cheese :p
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Concession
No worries. Reading my own words a day later, I realize I too reacted a bit too strongly.
The fact is that there truly do appear to be a number of bad actors - horse armorer's, so to speak, - in the current marketplace which has resulted in a pitchfork-and-torch waving crowd ready to swarm whatever avenues appears to provide a vent for their frustration.
My comments definitely crossed over into blaming the crowd, which is hardly fair. Just this morning I saw a headline that MGS V is now apparently a protection racket. Not my cuppa, but disgraceful if true.
So I too apologize - the misunderstanding of the crowd was quite understandable, and I gladly loft my coal shovel in support of your cause.
(Point of fact: Humans wielding coal shovels were long ago replaced by mechanical augers which provide a steady stream of fuel far more precisely.)
-BD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dead or Alive 5
The current price for the game itself is USD 39.99. The prices for the DLC packs (all of which are extra costumes) are as follows:
- 1 @ USD 19.99
- 2 @ USD 24.99
- 1 @ USD 29.99
- 3 @ USD 34.99
- 1 @ USD 54.99
- 2 @ USD 64.99
- 1 @ USD 74.99
Note that this isn't some obscure title. It's a big name fighting game that's available on the main console systems as well. And yet only on the PC do they have DLC that costs more than the game itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dead or Alive 5
"And yet only on the PC do they have DLC that costs more than the game itself."
A quick look at the XBox One and PS4 versions shows this is not true - it looks like the costume packs are similar prices across all platforms, although it seems to also be possible to buy individual costumes outside of the packs as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's like saying Second Life took third-party content too far, because buying every add-on and mod available would be too expensive. Technically true, but proving... what exactly?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have known train simulator afficianados and it is entirely unreasonable to think that many of them would want Everything or even Most things that were available. These guys (stereotyping but fairly true) want a specific type of train, maybe a specific one, and a specific type of track, maybe a specific one. This is not the best example.
The BS DLC is the day-one, on-disc (or pre-downloaded) levels or missions that seem like they were cut out of the game just to create another marketable good, all those times when it is painfully clear that the publisher is selling you half a game at full price.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Adding the Cost of All Optional DLC = Nonsense
People will buy the trains or songs they want and not buy the ones they don't want. Are the individual prices high? Well, they are higher than I would pay, but I don't give any shits about trains (and I suspect the authors of both this article and the Kotaku article aren't train enthusiasts either). I did spend hundreds of dollars on Guitar Hero/Rock Band songs because I loved those games and didn't feel for one second like I was getting ripped off or like I needed to buy ALL of the DLC. There was plenty of DLC that wasn't to my taste and I didn't buy it, and I suspect for most train enthusiasts the same would apply here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I disagree with the "cost"
Second, like other people are saying, how the pricing of digital models any different than physical models? If you buy an HO train engine for $200, isn't it functionally the same as a $15 motor, only with a prettier cover?
Okay, it can be argued that digital models don't have a cost of goods like physical models, but what's the digital modeller's time worth?
Third, let's compare apples to apples. How is this kind of DLC any different than 3d model sites like TurboSquid? You could say that it "costs" tens of thousands of dollars to buy every model, but no one person needs every model.
And what's the value of the model? If the market says $20 is a fair price for a digital model and people will pay it, then who are we to complain?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You misremembered that Thompson quote.
Actually it was in the mountains to the west of Vegas:
"So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark—that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back."
The Rockys pass through Utah into Colorado much further East. Thompson was probably looking at the Spring Mountains.
(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_and_Loathing_in_Las_Vegas#The_.22wave_speech.22)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I guess they could charge $499 the game bundle, force you to pay for it all at once, then lay every one off. Yeah, that must be the better option.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Block Signal system
I'd love dispatch to be more of a role where you could have multiplayer dispatch.
They do have ATC add ons for Flight Sim where somebody runs the ATC live over a server.
FS Sim X and Century Of Flight does have training modes for those 'realists' and sliders to adjust difficulty such s having realistic rudder system or mixing fuel at different heights and random instrument failures.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Agree but..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So many misguided comments
In the case of Train Simulator, you are given the ability to shape the game how you want right from the beginning. There is no story except your own. Train Simulator is YOUR train driving experience. From the latest and greatest like the Shanghai Maglev to the age of steam, and everything in between. You buy the parts of the game that you want. The Chicago railyards, the Canadian Rockies, the infamous Donner Pass, and many other locations from various time periods.
This game allows you to travel the world and go back in time at your leisure to operate some of the coolest trains in history! What would YOU pay to create your own experience as a fan of something? For railfans, Train Simulator is a downright bargain compared to driving all over the place to take pictures.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So many misguided comments
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I bought a number of DLC addons for railworks back in the day that were reasonable in price and content, but since Dovetail Games took over the franchise ive noticed that the same dlc's I bought before have now been split into different packs depending on the liverey. for example the class 101 pack I bought was about £11.99 but you got the class 101 in about 8 different liveries and about 10 scenarions. now its £11.99 for class 101 in 1-2 liveries with 2 scenarios. so basically people who are new to railworks are getting ripped off by DTG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Outrageous
Here's a concept: grow up. I don't go crying on the web because the latest model Mercedes is "overpriced." I don't curl up and suck my thumb if the latest "add-on" to whatever I CHOSE to buy is "too costly." I just DON'T BUY THE DAMNED THING!!!
It would behoove you gamers to take a course in economics instead of Whining 101.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]