Montana Discussion Thread

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30163
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1891 Post by flight50 » 01 Jul 2022 21:34

Your comment was based on tourist vs industry, not cargo. Cargo goes with Industry and company's. Yes I know all too well about ICCs. I constantly talk about it. But what you are saying is that the game has more tourist aspect with basically no industry. We don't have all the industries of the US in, we don't have a great selection of cargo and we don't have a flood of new company's. This, I know very well but Industry and Tourist is what you are speaking of. If you take a tally of scenic roads in the game and make a list of industry available in the game, tell me which one there is more of is what I'm saying.

I am not content with industries, companies nor cargo by any means in the game. It could be much much better. But I'd never say SCS focuses on tourism at all because ATS lacks ICCs. They have elements of tourist roads yes. Its a bonus, not a focus. You're twisting the intent in a direction that is far from the truth. The game lacks in many areas, No one is denying that. There are thousands of unused assets/prefabs in the game, yes. Any of them could be used yes, but they still vastly out number a tourist/scenic road like you are making it out to be. Just because they are non functioning, doesn't mean its tourist. They have purpose. Its fill the space or have blank space. You pick. but because more things are not deliverable, you're pissed. Complete the scene is what they are doing. Everything doesn't have to be active to have industry though. But yeah, call it defending SCS as usual. I call it logical to have fill in buildings if they are not functional. Too many functional depots is not good. We could have a few more than we do but even 50% active depots in a city is way too much.
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5386
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1892 Post by oldmanclippy » 01 Jul 2022 21:46

I think what seriousmods means, is that sometimes it seems like SCS puts a ton of passion and effort into the more scenic parts of the game, while ICCs get less passion and effort. Even though there are still far more ICCs than purely scenic parts. And I think that's a fair assessment. But on the flip side, SCS wasn't even going to include Yellowstone the most touristy natural location in the USA before the backlash started to ramp up. So tourism is very clearly not their focus. I think fun, scenery, visuals, and vibe are their focus, rather than the nitty gritty details that go into trucking and economy itself. Sometimes ICCs are part of that vision (Boeing factory, Denver airport, Hanover convention center, Western Star factory, Krone factory, etc), other times they get left behind like they did between Washington and Wyoming. Sometimes touristy roads are part of the vision (Yosemite, Rocky Mountain NP, Glacier), other times they're not (Yellowstone). ICCs I think SCS view as tools to accomplish their overall vision of fun/scenery/visuals/vibe, rather than as the main focus of the game itself. If ICCs were the focus, this game would look very different. SCS just has different priorities than some of us. That's fine, it's their game and they have a very large customer base who by and large agree with their vision. I honestly fall somewhere in the middle between SCS's vision and the vision of the more outspoken pro-simulation people here. My wants and desires are more about making the world feel more real, than making the actual operation of the truck feel more real. Weather, potholes, crowned roads, steep grades, longer on/off ramps, LTL/multidrop, stuff like that. I have no interest in pushing buttons or inspecting my tie-downs or filling out paperwork. But when people say that the game is a tourist simulator, I don't think it's backed up by evidence. It's a trucking simcade with an emphasis on vibe over the nitty gritty details.
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
Optional Features
Posts: 4784
Joined: 26 Sep 2019 20:14

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1893 Post by Optional Features » 01 Jul 2022 22:03

flight50 wrote: 01 Jul 2022 21:34 Your comment was based on tourist vs industry, not cargo. Cargo goes with Industry and company's. Yes I know all too well about ICCs. I constantly talk about it.
Cargo is part of industry, and every opportunity we get to get new cargo, we get none or less than expected. Just wait till Montana is released. See how many visible cargo options come with the state. I know you will be disappointed as will everyone.
But what you are saying is that the game has more tourist aspect with basically no industry.
You are arguing against a point that I didn't make. I didn't say we have no industry. We clearly have industry. So I wouldn't say we didn't if we clearly do. Do we have sufficient industry? No. But we do have industry.
We don't have all the industries of the US in, we don't have a great selection of cargo and we don't have a flood of new company's. This, I know very well but Industry and Tourist is what you are speaking of.
We don't need all of the industries of the US: we need one or two or five industries that are taken to their fullest potential. Right now, we have none. One would be nice. Take lumber. There could probably be 40 different types of lumber and wood related cargoes. There are like four. A wooden beam is not hard to model. A sheet of plywood is not hard to model. Yet we are leaving the last heavily forested state in the West with a clearly deficient forest industry. We will likely leave the Midwest in several years with an equally limited number of agricultural cargoes.
If you take a tally of scenic roads in the game and make a list of industry available in the game, tell me which one there is more of is what I'm saying.
That's not the point I'm making, though. The point I'm making is that the game is centered around looking at pretty scenery and buildings rather than delivering cargo from one industrial network to another. If you count the number of decorative buildings vs prefabs for industries, you will see what I mean. And if you look at the age of these prefabs compared with decorative buildings, again, you'll see my point.

A stadium without a trigger is scenery. So if I drive past five stadiums that have been modeled in the last say three years, and deliver to one warehouse that was modeled in 2010, I'd say the focus is scenery.
I am not content with industries, companies nor cargo by any means in the game. It could be much much better. But I'd never say SCS focuses on tourism at all because ATS lacks ICCs. They have elements of tourist roads yes. Its a bonus, not a focus. You're twisting the intent in a direction that is far from the truth.
I'm not twisting anything: I never said the game had more scenic routes than highways. This is a strawman. Scenic roads are just roads: the game needs a plethora of roads. But it also needs a plethora of drops, which are lacking. We got Crater Lake for example. Crater Lake is scenery. But we cannot deliver a snowplow or grader to Crater Lake: that is industry.
The game lacks in many areas, No one is denying that.
Plenty of people are denying it lol: there are posts in this forum all the time saying how "85%" of players just want to relax and think the game is fine as is, despite people on almost every platform available asking for features.
There are thousands of unused assets/prefabs in the game, yes. Any of them could be used yes, but they still vastly out number a tourist/scenic road like you are making it out to be. Just because they are non functioning, doesn't mean its tourist. They have purpose. Its fill the space or have blank space.
Filling a space with no other purpose is almost the literal definition of scenery, especially in a video game. It might not all be of the same type, but it's still scenery.
You pick. but because more things are not deliverable, you're pissed. Complete the scene is what they are doing. Everything doesn't have to be active to have industry though. But yeah, call it defending SCS as usual. I call it logical to have fill in buildings if they are not functional.
Of course we have to have buildings to fill space, but those buildings take a much higher priority than buildings we actually use. It should be more balanced if SCS was actually focused on industry, which they are not.
Too many functional depots is not good. We could have a few more than we do but even 50% active depots in a city is way too much.
We currently have probably 2% active. So saying we'll get to 50% is an extreme: it would be nice to have 10%, maybe 20%, but 50% would be an entirely new game developer.
Last edited by Optional Features on 01 Jul 2022 22:08, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
SouthernMan
Posts: 885
Joined: 07 Jun 2021 19:38
Location: Pilgrim on Earth

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1894 Post by SouthernMan » 01 Jul 2022 22:08

@oldmanclippy Agreed! Sometimes it seems that SCS is more concerned with delivering "beautiful" places/scenic places than delivering more functional things(iCCs). Of course I won't be hypocritical in saying that they're just making beautiful places and that's it... But... tbh, that's what it sounds like. Anyway, I could be wrong. But I agree with what you said.
Study will not always make you wise, sometimes it will simply make you more superb.
Optional Features
Posts: 4784
Joined: 26 Sep 2019 20:14

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1895 Post by Optional Features » 01 Jul 2022 22:16

And at that, they have succeeded. The map is incredibly pretty and scenic, but the number and diversity of places to drop is very limited.

ETS1 warehouses still are being used in new dlcs with no sign of that changing. Remove those, and a significant percentage of the warehouse deliveries in game would disappear with them.

Same for Eddy's and Whole Goods.
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5386
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1896 Post by oldmanclippy » 01 Jul 2022 22:22

I didn't see the 18 Wheels prefab, but I took a job from Municipal Waste Management in Cody and that was a nice new prefab. I'm hoping that's a good sign. In blog screenshots we've seen some reused prefabs in Montana but a good number of new ones too.

Cody is absolutely amazing, the city seems to be almost entirely new in terms of prefabs, and non-deliverable companies. If they put half as much effort into making new deliverable prefabs and ICCs as they did with the nondeliverable parts of Cody, that'd be a big step in the right direction for ATS. The passion is there, the skill is there, the talent is there. They just need to apply it evenly across all aspects of the game. It's why I'm not super worried. If Montana and Texas go by and the ICC/prefab side hasn't caught up with the nondeliverable side, then I'll worry.
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
JulioMasterBR
Posts: 45
Joined: 09 Mar 2021 17:12
Contact:

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1897 Post by JulioMasterBR » 01 Jul 2022 22:26

seriousmods wrote: 01 Jul 2022 22:03
flight50 wrote: 01 Jul 2022 21:34 Your comment was based on tourist vs industry, not cargo. Cargo goes with Industry and company's. Yes I know all too well about ICCs. I constantly talk about it.
Cargo is part of industry, and every opportunity we get to get new cargo, we get none or less than expected. Just wait till Montana is released. See how many visible cargo options come with the state. I know you will be disappointed as will everyone.
But what you are saying is that the game has more tourist aspect with basically no industry.
You are arguing against a point that I didn't make. I didn't say we have no industry. We clearly have industry. So I wouldn't say we didn't if we clearly do. Do we have sufficient industry? No. But we do have industry.
We don't have all the industries of the US in, we don't have a great selection of cargo and we don't have a flood of new company's. This, I know very well but Industry and Tourist is what you are speaking of.
We don't need all of the industries of the US: we need one or two or five industries that are taken to their fullest potential. Right now, we have none. One would be nice. Take lumber. There could probably be 40 different types of lumber and wood related cargoes. There are like four. A wooden beam is not hard to model. A sheet of plywood is not hard to model. Yet we are leaving the last heavily forested state in the West with a clearly deficient forest industry. We will likely leave the Midwest in several years with an equally limited number of agricultural cargoes.
If you take a tally of scenic roads in the game and make a list of industry available in the game, tell me which one there is more of is what I'm saying.
That's not the point I'm making, though. The point I'm making is that the game is centered around looking at pretty scenery and buildings rather than delivering cargo from one industrial network to another. If you count the number of decorative buildings vs prefabs for industries, you will see what I mean. And if you look at the age of these prefabs compared with decorative buildings, again, you'll see my point.

A stadium without a trigger is scenery. So if I drive past five stadiums that have been modeled in the last say three years, and deliver to one warehouse that was modeled in 2010, I'd say the focus is scenery.
I am not content with industries, companies nor cargo by any means in the game. It could be much much better. But I'd never say SCS focuses on tourism at all because ATS lacks ICCs. They have elements of tourist roads yes. Its a bonus, not a focus. You're twisting the intent in a direction that is far from the truth.
I'm not twisting anything: I never said the game had more scenic routes than highways. This is a strawman. Scenic roads are just roads: the game needs a plethora of roads. But it also needs a plethora of drops, which are lacking. We got Crater Lake for example. Crater Lake is scenery. But we cannot deliver a snowplow or grader to Crater Lake: that is industry.
The game lacks in many areas, No one is denying that.
Plenty of people are denying it lol: there are posts in this forum all the time saying how "85%" of players just want to relax and think the game is fine as is, despite people on almost every platform available asking for features.
There are thousands of unused assets/prefabs in the game, yes. Any of them could be used yes, but they still vastly out number a tourist/scenic road like you are making it out to be. Just because they are non functioning, doesn't mean its tourist. They have purpose. Its fill the space or have blank space.
Filling a space with no other purpose is almost the literal definition of scenery, especially in a video game. It might not all be of the same type, but it's still scenery.
You pick. but because more things are not deliverable, you're pissed. Complete the scene is what they are doing. Everything doesn't have to be active to have industry though. But yeah, call it defending SCS as usual. I call it logical to have fill in buildings if they are not functional.
Of course we have to have buildings to fill space, but those buildings take a much higher priority than buildings we actually use. It should be more balanced if SCS was actually focused on industry, which they are not.
Too many functional depots is not good. We could have a few more than we do but even 50% active depots in a city is way too much.
We currently have probably 2% active. So saying we'll get to 50% is an extreme: it would be nice to have 10%, maybe 20%, but 50% would be an entirely new game developer.
I agree 100% with everything you said. Many of those who say the game is perfect just play only on youtube.
Optional Features
Posts: 4784
Joined: 26 Sep 2019 20:14

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1898 Post by Optional Features » 01 Jul 2022 22:27

Let me ask a question to which I don't know the answer. In the state of Wyoming (and Colorado, too), what percentage of deliverable companies were prefabs not used anywhere else in the map?
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30163
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1899 Post by flight50 » 01 Jul 2022 22:42

We obviously have 2 different definitions for the words touristic and scenic. They are not interchangeable words for me. Scenic cities (non functioning) is not touristic for me. It's filler to take up space while touristic sites are the sites like YS, Yomite, Grand Canyon, RMNP, etc.

@oldmanclippy 18 Wheels is West of MWM in Cody.
Last edited by flight50 on 01 Jul 2022 22:45, edited 1 time in total.
Optional Features
Posts: 4784
Joined: 26 Sep 2019 20:14

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#1900 Post by Optional Features » 01 Jul 2022 22:45

flight50 wrote: 01 Jul 2022 22:42 We obviously have 2 different definitions for the words touristic and scenic. They are not interchangeable words for me. Scenic cities (non functioning) is not touristic for me. It's filler to take up space while touristic sites are the sites like YS, Yomite, Grand Canyon, RMNP, etc.
Isn't the purpose of tourism to look at scenery? Therefore, a scenic city is designed for a touristic view of the game world as opposed to an industrial view.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Rocksteady and 13 guests