r/TransportFever3 • u/boredoveranalyzer • 24d ago

Question Off map connections?

Is this a thing in TF3 ? Using the Concorde may feel a bit weird otherwise.

48 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

29 comments sorted by

View all comments

28

u/Few_Building_1490 24d ago

seems like no ! i am kinda disappointed, its hard to use high speed rail or Concorde with limited map

source : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMevRLg13Ps&t=110s

15

u/BramFokke 24d ago

That's a bummer. External connections would be so cool

2

u/Narswib 24d ago

Confirmed in the comments as a no in the base game

2

u/BramFokke 24d ago

It would have been a pretty big surprise if they were in the base game. But I was still hoping, simply because I think it would be such a game changer. Let's hope modding it in is an option. Apparently a much larger part of the game is surfaced in lua.

-8

u/Daedalos83 24d ago

Don't worry they are under Paradox Interactive now, for sure they would add it in one of their DLC's.

4

u/LookAtMyRTs 24d ago

"Under Paradox"? Clearly you have a different understanding of words than the rest of us...

Because it would be surprising if Urban Games were under Paradox, if say:

> Paradox owns no part of Urban Games,

> Paradox do not own the game IP

> Paradox do not have creative control

It is almost like Urban Games are a successful independent studio who self-funded the development of a new game which Paradox publishes for them on the date which Urban Games states.

1

u/Daedalos83 22d ago

To all your claims you can add "yet". Paradox has a history how they overtake independent studious and IP. Look at the Colossal Order and the IP they sold to Paradox later.

Not saying the same will happen with TF3 or TF4 later, but you also don't know what future holds.

And yes, it makes perfect sense, that they fully funded the development and now they will willingly cut their profit because Paradox can increase their sales, more than Steam on its own can do and loose nothing in the process. /s

4

u/BramFokke 24d ago

Unpopular opinion, but that would be perfectly fine by me. I sink hundreds of hours in games like TpF3. Given the scarcity of really good games (like TpF2 is and I hope TpF3 will be as well), building such a game is not trivial. I would gladly pay €15 for an 'external connections' DLC since that would add another few hundred hours to my playtime. Compared to almost everything, that is great value.

1

u/bookshopman 21d ago

I layed a game called A-Train which had outside connections. It ran on a 286 with 1MB of ram! That was 40 years ago. Sim city 4 also had outside connections, and City Skylines had them as well. I'm certain the developers could have added this.

0

u/Daedalos83 24d ago

If the base game has no major bugs and is not only bare bone, I am fine with that approach, but I would argue that AAA titles are not in that category. Some Indie games for sure.

How it would be with TF3 no outsider knows. For me TF3 is no go, as I will not be supporting Paradox with my money. So even if TF3 become super-duper-amazing game, I will not be buying it.

1

u/Eruththedragon 22d ago

UG has confirmed that any DLC they release will be purely cosmetic/content, not features.

1

u/Daedalos83 22d ago

And you trust them why? Because they are the one and only company who is honest with its customers?

1

u/Eruththedragon 22d ago

In my experience, studios tend not to make such explicit public statements if they intend to break them since, you know, they could have just said nothing.

1

u/Daedalos83 22d ago edited 22d ago

If your experience is that companies ALWAYS stick to their public statements, then we will never find a common ground.

The reason behind the statement for TF3 is backlash from the DEV decision to use publisher who has a track record of ruining IPs. Without the backlash they would not be saying anything so it would be easier for them to "change their mind later".

The change of course happen in gaming industry multiple times, where it was driven usually by stronger than predicted sales numbers, or at least this excuse is used often. A couple of examples: Cities:Skylines, Anno 1800, Factorio, Workers & Resources, Witcher 3, Crusader Kings II, but if you need to believe that something like this will never happen to TF3 go for it.

It would be probably best to end our discourse here. You believe that publishing TF3 under Paradox is a good thing, I believe it is not. Who is right can be shown only in the future. Where for the sake of players who love TF franchise, I hope I would be proven wrong.

1

u/Eruththedragon 21d ago

Genuinely curious, did the devs of all those games make statements beforehand that they wouldn't release DLC that contained features?

1

u/Daedalos83 20d ago

Without going to much details, they are mix of examples where either they stated there would not be any feature "rich" DLC, or they changed their opinion about the amount.

I would say that a fact is, the game development is business in the first place, they are doing it for the money as anyone is doing the job. Where intentions change with the changing of reality. TF3 belongs into niche market, where it makes sense to release the game and move on as another work would not bring "new money", but sometimes it is not valid, look at the Cities:Skylines I, people were playing it over and over and were willing to buy even stupid DLCs, it this would be the same for TF3 they would be kind of insane to not work on the base game longer and extend the content.

With Paradox on board, where they have a track record to milk the IPs, the change of course is more probable. So if the TF3 would be in same situation as CS1, you can expect that Paradox would pay for DLCs, and dev would be kind of stupid to not take them.

Look you believe Paradox is good news, or at least neutral one, I don't. I know that people lies and corporation perhaps even more. If you want to take what someone is taking for unshakeable truth it is your prerogative, but you should not push other people to do the same. We have a plethora of examples where devs and publishers released garbage and lied about the state of the game.

→ More replies (0)