The flawed process of creating, promoting and releasing T:ANE seems to have reduced the enthusiasm for the products. T:ANE looks like it is working for more people BUT after a very divisive year what have we been sold? Is the product sufficiently different to warrant the cost? Does it offer enough added functions to justify the hassle of being forced to debug a product you paid for? and so on....
What did we get - moving switches, specular lighting and shadows. Interlocking Towers has yet to appear in a form I can understand. Could that have been done in TS2012?
Yes, we all complained about the lack of shadows and the visual appearance of the product. But once you see it you wonder if it all was worthwhile??
Then we have to consider 2016. Will it bring the beginning of the transition from a simulator to a train game. Will the functional side be dressed in a more user friendly interface such as was done with RailWorks. Is 2016 going to see a significantly reduced development by talented and dedicated customers who have literally kept the products alive. N3V is planning to reward people who develop items for T:ANE. But, does that include a new rule or a boxcar with a mono-colored -paint job?
What did we get - moving switches, specular lighting and shadows. Interlocking Towers has yet to appear in a form I can understand. Could that have been done in TS2012?
Yes, we all complained about the lack of shadows and the visual appearance of the product. But once you see it you wonder if it all was worthwhile??
Then we have to consider 2016. Will it bring the beginning of the transition from a simulator to a train game. Will the functional side be dressed in a more user friendly interface such as was done with RailWorks. Is 2016 going to see a significantly reduced development by talented and dedicated customers who have literally kept the products alive. N3V is planning to reward people who develop items for T:ANE. But, does that include a new rule or a boxcar with a mono-colored -paint job?
Comment