Petition to S.C.S for a SDK

[Lagger123987]

What you guys think? Should we ask S.C.S to release a SDK?

[fatty]

Go for it, but it will never happen, for the same reason that we aren't "allowed" to make our own units.

[OneShot]

We can ask SCS for a lot of things but this is something we most likely wont get ... why? Because DW is just an offspin of SCS product for its goverment customers. They make money by creating platforms and stuff for them. Guess what they don't want ... that those customers can get their new platforms and whatnot for free.

But hey ... it never hurts to ask - just dont hold your breath.

Cheers
OS

[Dr.Sid]

They won't make it anyway. Such thing needs documentation and support. And it will expose bugs not exposed yet.
It is more expensive then not releasing anything, that's sure :|\\

[Chock]

Would be nice, but... You might as well ask for the plans to the real platforms for all you are likely get anywhere LOL.

As OneShot points out, they'll not want to feed the hand that will clearly bite it!

[Lagger123987]

Just keep up the votes up then we band together to force S.C.S to release it.

[azn_132]

Just keep up the votes up then we band together to force S.C.S to release it.

How are u goin to force S.C.S to release a SDK?

[Lagger123987]

Just keep up the votes up then we band together to force S.C.S to release it.

How are u goin to force S.C.S to release a SDK?

By getting a lot of support from these DW guys and say yes and band together for a big crowd to release a SDK.

[Nightmare]

How are u goin to force S.C.S to release a SDK?
By getting a lot of support from these DW guys and say yes and band together for a big crowd to release a SDK. I***8217;m surprised at how little people know about business, let alone the business for making software. Companies will not give something away for free when doing it can make them money. Especially if they are already charging for it in one of their other forms of buiness.

If it's counter productive to how S.C.S does it's business, whether that is on the government side or commercial, they won***8217;t do it. It won***8217;t matter if you have the entire forum signing ***8220;yes***8221; or not. It won't matter if they all are kicking or screaming about it either.

90% of S.C.S business is government contract work, and they use the game engine for DW in government simulations. They also charge good money to add platforms and other things to the engine per contract basis. If they release the SDK, they***8217;d be giving away one of their capabilities to make money for their business.

[Castout]

What is SDK?

A realistic DW version for the gov? If we petition now they probably will release it to the public in 50 years. Fingers crossed. I hope i'll live to that age....:shifty:.

Yea i want it to be released to the public. But we've got to be more realistic abt what we ask...

[Nightmare]

What is SDK?

A realistic DW version for the gov? If we petition now they probably will release it to the public in 50 years. Fingers crossed. I hope i'll live to that age....:shifty:.

Yea i want it to be released to the public. But we've got to be more realistic abt what we ask...SDK stands for Software Development Kit. It***8217;s typically a set of development tools that allow modders and programmers to make changes within the framework of an application or game. Take Half Life for example. Releasing the SDK for Half Life made it possible for the creation of Counter-Strike. Without the SDK, 90% of what needed to be done to create Counter-Strike would not have been possible.

[Fish]

Just keep up the votes up then we band together to force S.C.S to release it.

How are u goin to force S.C.S to release a SDK?

By getting a lot of support from these DW guys and say yes and band together for a big crowd to release a SDK.

This didn't work, so getting a few votes here ........................... :hmm:

http://www.subsim.com/ssr/fixmy688.html

[PeriscopeDepth]

I wish they did what the Steel Beasts people do: after they make a platform for a military customer, include it in the game via patches!

PD

[porphy]

I wish they did what the Steel Beasts people do: after they make a platform for a military customer, include it in the game via patches!


That is very true. SBPro PE and the team behind it is the role model when it comes to developing and supporting niche simulations for public use, me thinks. And tanks are almost as cool as subs... :cool:

Cheers Porphy

[SUBMAN1]

I voted no simply because it is something you will never get. It is pretty clear that they have a tech base that they are not willing to give up - why? Because suppose they decide to make a Ticonderoga sim based on this engine, yet someone has already done it? Basically, an SDK is taking money out of their pockets.

-S

[Sea Demon]

I vote for us trying to build more support for DW, so maybe Sonalysts will just build us new add-ons. Seems to me that that's the only way with this sim. They're only going to do it if it's profitable for them. And I wouldn't expect it any other way. This poll is not useful in any way. :down:

[LuftWolf]

I vote for someone else to mod DW besides me. :p

But I guess there is no glory in fixing a broken sim, only in making shiny new toys.

Anyone out there in the ether interested and capable of importing the SCXIIc non-playable platforms into the DW database? If so, please PM me as soon as practicable.

Cheers,
David

[Nightmare]

I vote for us trying to build more support for DW, so maybe Sonalysts will just build us new add-ons. Seems to me that that's the only way with this sim. They're only going to do it if it's profitable for them. And I wouldn't expect it any other way. This poll is not useful in any way. :down:
Jamie, before he left S.C.S, stated that DW was a disappointment as far as sales went that it failed to meet S.C.S financial goals. Jamie also mentioned that they had to now focus on more profitable areas of their business. Now I don’t know if this means that they didn’t make any or much money or not. However I believe by that statement that the future of DW is pretty dim. If DW was considered a financial failure by it’s creators, I don’t possibly see them supporting it beyond where the game currently is now.

[Hawk66]

We can ask SCS for a lot of things but this is something we most likely wont get ... why? Because DW is just an offspin of SCS product for its goverment customers. They make money by creating platforms and stuff for them. Guess what they don't want ... that those customers can get their new platforms and whatnot for free.
Probably true. But perhaps a limited SDK would be possible. The limitation could be, that you cannot create new units but that you could enhance the existing ones and other areas, like AI, engine, mission editor and so on.

Regarding the comparison to SBPro. I don't know the license politics of SCS in detail, but is DW not only licensable to endusers and not to commercial/government users?

Anyway, an official statement of SCS regarding this issue and the future of DW in general, would be nice. In the other case, this topic arise in the community on a regulary basis, which does not have any positive effects.

[OneShot]

Probably true. But perhaps a limited SDK would be possible. The limitation could be, that you cannot create new units but that you could enhance the existing ones and other areas, like AI, engine, mission editor and so on.
Well we do have sort of an limited SDK already ... We can play around with the doctrines and the database, we have a powerful mission editor, we can tamper with the graphics and the sound to some extend (tho we dont have access to the engine itself). What we cant do is play around with the hardcoded AI, interfaces and all the stuff thats in the engine itself.

In other words we do have already a lot of possibilities to play around with the game, however only few of the community have taken the steps to work on those ... And aside from things in the game there is a lot of stuff relating to the game that could be done and again only a small number is actually doing something in those areas. For example comprehensive tutorials (yes we do have some, but some areas - especially the FFG are still pretty sparse), wider range of missions (you know there are more then just the sub platforms in the game ... the majority of missions still centers around the sub platforms). So, lots of possibilities, but whenever there is a call for stuff you see a lot of views on the relevant posts on the forum but zero answers.

But when somebody wants to petition SCS for new platforms, everybody jumps on the bandwagon and everything will be better - if SCS could just include a Tico, Burke, another sub, SSBN, whatever (fill in your favourite platform). Sure, its a lot easier to use stuff others made then put in some time yourself.

Btw. : Big thanks and kudos to all the modders, mission designers and everybody else in the community who try to enrich the game and our experience with it.

Cheers
OS

[Hawk66]

No reason to be angry. As you perhaps know, I've already started work on a tool (RandomEnviornment). Hence, I'm not just passive and 'whining'.

The mission editor is indeed powerful but in some areas the engine/AI have deficits. Specially in that areas, which you've mentioned (non-Sub) and when you want to include air platforms you reach the limit of the engine.

A SDK would just enrich the possibilites, nothing more. Have a look at those games/sims, which provide one (or a 'real' script language) like Civ4,ArmedAssault and Orbiter and how the AddOns 'boosted' the original sim.

[LuftWolf]

It's hard to see who is going to make all these future mods when we can't even get a list of playable scenarios together. :-?

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=105791

Cheers,
David

[kage]

There's something I'd rather see than an SDK allowing external pieces of software to be attached to the game.

A proper scripting language - perhaps Python, or LUA, - and the ability to do these things through it:

All the things that can be done by current "scripts" (actionlists would be a better name)
Get the position of an object
Transform a position
Create a new object
Move an object
Create a trigger, possibly attaching it to an object.
Set the status of each and every sensor on an object, player or not. (Damaged, passive, active)
Ditto for weapons systems, perhaps even to the point of controlling each round being fired.
Create text messages on the fly and send to players, with the possibility of only doing it if they are able to receive right at that moment.
Change the environmental conditions

Here's a couple example scenarios:
-A plane has an accident, breakdown, or gets shot down.
Get its position, Tell the player _where_ the bailout occurred by radio message (wherever it was) create a downed pilot at that location, create and attach an approach (pickup) trigger, and activate a "radio beacon" sensor (detects nothing but is counterdetected by esm) - though that sensor would likely have to be added by mod. (For a script to create, for a scenario, a new sensor, launcher, or object, would be great, but probably way beyond reasonable.) When a ship does get close, activate a flare launcher.
-Have a ship start using active sonar the moment it detects an enemy, and not before.
-Implement random neutrals in a truly run-time randomized way.
-Randomizing environmentals run-time.


And let's not forget, an in-game editor worth more than two grains of salt :damn: :damn:
Perhaps the ability to override doctrines and AI on an individual basis. Builtin Voice comms and Join-In-Progress - there's just sooooooo many things I'd like to see done to this game that would make it better.

Will it be worth the effort (to SCS) to do these things though?

[Dr.Sid]

DW is dead. Face it.

[MSgalileo]

I ask SCS for the replay format file for some months, I am waiting ...zzzzzzzzzzzz (they have to check if they can release it)

[LuftWolf]

DW is dead. Face it.

Ouch. That's a bit dire.

I'd say it's about 35% of the way through it's life cycle with over half left to go.

Considering it's most likely the first and last multiplatform naval sim (Battlestations: Midway DOES NOT count) of the last, this, and most likely the next generation of hardware, anyone in the world who suddenly decides they want to play such a game is basically stuck with one choice, so long as it is still available.

The problem is simple: DW never had and currently does not have the same level of community support that SC enjoyed during the development of SCX.

Any number of things can solve the problem, but the simple fact is that right now most of the old guard is gone, what's left is tired, and little of the new blood has stayed long enough to matter.

Compound that with the fact that this community has FAR more sub-divisions vis-a-vis virtual fleets and even modding groups than it should (not all are SubSim projects but this lay of the land thank you SCS), so what's left is diffused to the point that no one ever talks to one another in any meaningful way, except on the rare occasion there is a common complaint.

Cheers,
David

PS As a follow-up, SCS screwed the pooch big time by leaving Battlefront. First of all, they wound up sinking A LOT more money into a developing distribution networks that returned a lot less of the final sale price to SCS. Second, they essentially auto-destructed the fledgling community of primarily Battlefront customers (of which I was one, having come to the product because I trusted BF) that was co-existing on the BFC forums and here at SubSim. Third, they totally missed the boat on getting on-board with the world-wide distribution capabilities and prowess of CDV, a FAR better publisher than STEAM, Strategy First, and BlackBean or whatever it's called, which has a history of doing full box distributions of games that were successful for some time at Battlefront (the Combat Mission series), which DW would have been, if they had simply given it time to catch some buzz.

[Hawk66]

DW is dead. Face it.
Ouch. That's a bit dire.

I'd say it's about 35% of the way through it's life cycle with over half left to go.

Considering it's most likely the first and last multiplatform naval sim (Battlestations: Midway DOES NOT count) of the last, this, and most likely the next generation of hardware, anyone in the world who suddenly decides they want to play such a game is basically stuck with one choice, so long as it is still available.

Probably True. And I like the idea of a limited SDK (or call it just a limited script integration) of Kage, because it would not harm the core business of SCS and would be much less effort as a general SDK.

Personally, I don't need new plattforms/mods, I find the existing variety good and sufficient. But what I really miss is that I have a tool to be really creative in mission design, like Kage has particulized. I've wasted hours when I've tried to create complex mission, which involved air plattforms etc. At first I've found it funny, when , for example, AAW missiles did a 180 degree turnaround and vanished and so on. But after a couple of hours I got angry and lost interest.

You can compare it with ArmedAssault in a rough way. The engine is far from being perfect. But you can find a lot of workarounds in mission design by using the provided script language and control of the AI behaviour. It even makes fun to play with these tools.

At least I would like to have some kind of feedback of SCS on this issue, if they have still at least some basic interest in customer relations for their 'entertainment' branch. Getting in touch with the communiy to discuss this matter from their perspective in a constructive way costs only a limited time and even might leed to a solution, which is acceptable by both parties.

Hope dies last.

[Dr.Sid]

Hope died last .. but mine died already .. :rotfl:
Not that I don't enjoy the game. I just consider it 'old game' like let's say first Tomb Raider.

[Frying Tiger]

Since I've posted here and on the SCS boards that no decisions one way or the other have been made on DW future patches, upgrades, or anything else, and I'd let you know when there was a decision, what more can I say at this point?

No decisions have been made. Still. Sonalysts has a lot of projects, and likes to work on stuff that makes money. DW didn't make money. So it's an uphill battle to get the company to finance more work on it, unless we (the game unit) can make a compelling case it will be good for the bottom line.

That said, the game unit likes working on games, so we're listening to this stuff, even if we don't have much response on a day to day basis. I prefer (as a customer myself of SCS and other sims) not to blow happy gas around, and then have to walk it back if harsh economic reality rears its ugly head! (grin)

[Dr.Sid]

Sure .. ideas always comes handy. Expectations hardly so. That's what I mean.

Anyway since I can afford not being 'correct' I read Tiger's 'not decided yet' as 'dead for now'.

[Frying Tiger]

No, it means "not decided yet" (grin) If it was "dead" I wouldn't be wasting the company's money posting on these boards, would I? (okay, so maybe I would do it on my own time, but you see the point!)

[SUBMAN1]

No, it means "not decided yet" (grin) If it was "dead" I wouldn't be wasting the company's money posting on these boards, would I? (okay, so maybe I would do it on my own time, but you see the point!)

So I guess we can still hold out and wait (and hope) for a Ticonderoga add on then? :D I think that would make your money since a lot of DW was done before in Sub Command, but a Ticonderoga would be a ship I'd love to sink my teeth into!

There was one Ticonderoga sim many years back, and I loved that one to death!

-S

[Sea Demon]

So I guess we can still hold out and wait (and hope) for a Ticonderoga add on then? :D I

Oh, yes. Oh God yes. Or an Arleigh Burke.

[SUBMAN1]

So I guess we can still hold out and wait (and hope) for a Ticonderoga add on then? :D I
Oh, yes. Oh God yes. Or an Arleigh Burke.

Yeah - just give me something with an Aegis radar and a ton of VLS tubes! :p

[Dr.Sid]

And 10 new subs and sh3 graphics and all that .. lol .. you see ? No point ..

Tiger: good to hear that .. anyway one man on the forums .. it is not much 'alive' either.

[SUBMAN1]

And 10 new subs and sh3 graphics and all that .. lol .. you see ? No point ..

Tiger: good to hear that .. anyway one man on the forums .. it is not much 'alive' either.

I can dream ya know!

Maybe a grass roots Tico sim is needed these days? It has been 15 years since I programmed something so I am probably out.

-S

[OneShot]

Tiger: good to hear that .. anyway one man on the forums .. it is not much 'alive' either.There was never more then one one the forums. Before FT it was Jamie. Sure others were listed as Mods or as Forum users, but in effect for over 95% of the time only Jamie posted stuff.

Cheers
OS

[Dr.Sid]

Don't get me wrong .. I didn't mean 1 men is not enough for forums, or that there never was more such men.

I meant that if there is one man on the forums, and he is the only man allocated to the project, and his only job is to give support on the form (I mean concerning the project, I guess he does something more), it means the project is not much alive.

Sorry for spoiling the debate .. won't do it anymore. But wait ! It made Tiger talk again :cool: At least we know it's not officially dead.

[Frying Tiger]

If you call me out, I'll respond. I read the board almost every day, sometimes on weekends too. I just don't post unless I have something to say, and with the current situation I've basically got no news for you on a day-to-day basis. And since I'm new (by Sonalysts standards) I've got to be very careful what I post, since almost everything the company does is either proprietary or an actual government secret.

[Dr.Sid]

I really appreciate your work, Tiger, as well as all SCS efforts. :up:

I just see no point in posting requests for updates, or even for full graphics overhaul. It's the less probable thing to happen to DW, isn't it ?

Only way we could get better graphics is new software title, or at least, if I would build new graphical engine, I would give the game new name :D

[Sea Demon]

I really appreciate your work, Tiger, as well as all SCS efforts. :up:


Only way we could get better graphics is new software title, or at least, if I would build new graphical engine, I would give the game new name :D

I appreciate all the work of the Sonalysts people as well. :up:

I think Sonalysts next game, if there is one, is going to be Fleet Command 2.

[Wim Libaers]

I voted no simply because it is something you will never get. It is pretty clear that they have a tech base that they are not willing to give up - why? Because suppose they decide to make a Ticonderoga sim based on this engine, yet someone has already done it? Basically, an SDK is taking money out of their pockets.

-S


That's only if they are planning addons. If, as some people think, they have mostly abandoned the game and do not expect to profit more from it, they wouldn't lose money. However, making extra tools available means someone will have to spend time on that, for no expected gain for the company, so that's unlikely too, although it has happened with some other games such as MiG Alley, EECH and (questionable circumstances) Falcon 4.



But when somebody wants to petition SCS for new platforms, everybody jumps on the bandwagon and everything will be better - if SCS could just include a Tico, Burke, another sub, SSBN, whatever (fill in your favourite platform). Sure, its a lot easier to use stuff others made then put in some time yourself.


Agreed, but it's not unreasonable to ask SCS if SCS prohibits new platform modding.

[OneShot]

But when somebody wants to petition SCS for new platforms, everybody jumps on the bandwagon and everything will be better - if SCS could just include a Tico, Burke, another sub, SSBN, whatever (fill in your favourite platform). Sure, its a lot easier to use stuff others made then put in some time yourself.


Agreed, but it's not unreasonable to ask SCS if SCS prohibits new platform modding.

Sure its not unreasonable, but especially that question has been asked over and over again, even from before this game was released the first time. The answer to that question can be easily found and still it seems that people think by asking this question again and again the answer will be different. SCS has made it pretty clear whats ok by them and whats not.

[XabbaRus]

ONe of the reasons DW is now off my HD.

[Sea Demon]

ONe of the reasons DW is now off my HD.

Because of no new playables added on?

[XabbaRus]

No because I got disillusioned with the whole thing.

[Phullbrick]

All of this is sad... I see a dying product with no more support, I see players leaving everyday, we can't really mod the game, we can't add content, we can't change what's wrong, we miss precious options (saved online missions for longer games)

See my Flight Simulator 9 in my left hand with 30 Go of addons & mods made by the community... See Dangerous Waters on the other hand...

I just can see the small french community moving to other games and there's nothing we can do :shifty: Hopefully we still have Ubi making some sims like SH3/SH4 but I see no bright future.

[nemo67]

All of this is sad... I see a dying product with no more support, I see players leaving everyday, we can't really mod the game, we can't add content, we can't change what's wrong, we miss precious options (saved online missions for longer games)

See my Flight Simulator 9 in my left hand with 30 Go of addons & mods made by the community... See Dangerous Waters on the other hand...

I just can see the small french community moving to other games and there's nothing we can do :shifty: Hopefully we still have Ubi making some sims like SH3/SH4 but I see no bright future.

it is the end of the simulation of the modern naval war:damn::damn:

[Sea Demon]

No because I got disillusioned with the whole thing.

That's understandable. It's hard to see any optimism for the continuation and further developments or refinements to this product. I'm still having alot of fun making assorted unscripted naval scenarios and playing them out using DW as the engine. But still, I would like to see more content. DW is still on my hard drive. And I don't see it leaving anytime soon. While I'm not disillusioned, I'm not very hopeful. For me, DW is the best naval sim that I've played. And yes, to me, Silent Hunter series games (while good/ and uber excellent graphically) don't measure up to the things DW brings to the table. Just MHO. Take it or leave it. But all in all, it's disappointing to me if Sonalysts don't produce anything further for the commercial market.:cry:

[LuftWolf]

To this day, I find it hillarious that people who have no interest in actually doing any modding work, complain that the modding of DW is limited. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

If anything, it is the modders who walked out and abandoned SCS, not the other way around. :shifty:

Cheers,
David

[Phullbrick]

Silent Hunter series games (while good/ and uber excellent graphically) don't measure up to the things DW brings to the table.
I don't agree with this affirmation.

We have a word here "you don't catch flies with vinegar"

Maybe an excellent simulation with poor 3D/sound/inteface like DW is enough for the most fanatic fan, I guess it's true as we are still talking about it, but not for the crowd

In the last 2 years, our community (mille-sabords) had a chance to be present at 2 simulation shows (Simulation Passion) at Paris Charles de Gaulle airport. We were the only naval simulation community and we showed to the public during 3 days our current games (SH2&DC, SH3, SH4, DW, Virtual Skipper). The rest of the show was made of other simulation communites (train, car, airplanes etc.) there was also a cockpit simulator brought by the French Air Forces. Believe me or not but when it came to show the naval simulation games, only a (very) few of the people were interested by DW, all the eyes went for Virtual Skipper and SH4 because that's a fact, today you can't attract new people with a 10 y old looking simulation eve if this simulation is the top of cream...

See http://www.mille-sabords.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=15371 for photos of the last show
A video link made by the french IVAO guys http://www.mediaviation.net/ivao/CDG06/le%20bourget%20roissy.wmv

I just can hope SCS would be able to make a partnership with an experienced gaming company which would have the skills and ressources to do a modern simulation using the state of the art graphics, sounds, interface, net code etc while SCS would provide the military and technical knowledge (ie algorithms) for the best possible realism. Imho they can't do it alone by themselves, it's not their core business, and that's why we are here today.

http://www.simulation-france-magazine.com/images/sp.jpg

[LuftWolf]

I just can hope SCS would be able to make a partnership with an experienced gaming company which would have the skills and ressources to do a modern simulation using the state of the art graphics, sounds, interface, net code etc while SCS would provide the military and technical knowledge (ie algorithms) for the best possible realism. Imho they can't do it alone by themselves, it's not their core business, and that's why we are here today.

Yes.

Yes.

And also, yes. :up:

The best product would be the result of a liscensing the NSE and basic interface modules to a professional game development company with an established relationship with one or more publishers. Before this occured, however, SCS would have to clear it with their primary contractee, the US Goverment, so this is of course a major hurdle... it's likely they have been given the go-ahead to develop a commercial product in-house only.

Cheers,
David

[Dr.Sid]

Pah .. I wouldn't buy NSE .. what's so cool about it ?

[LuftWolf]

Pah .. I wouldn't buy NSE .. what's so cool about it ?

NavalSimEngine

The core of DW, comprising all the engines aside from the graphics and sound.

Cheers,
David

[Dr.Sid]

Pah .. I wouldn't buy NSE .. what's so cool about it ?
NavalSimEngine

The core of DW, comprising all the engines aside from the graphics and sound.

Cheers,
David

I know what it is .. I don't know what is cool about it. It too needs a lot of work, or complete redesign. Radar, ballistics, sonar, object definition .. all is just simplest possible and we want much more.

[Sea Demon]

To this day, I find it hillarious that people who have no interest in actually doing any modding work, complain that the modding of DW is limited. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

If anything, it is the modders who walked out and abandoned SCS, not the other way around. :shifty:

Cheers,
David

Relax LW. :) I'm not complaining about your mods or any of your efforts. You've done great work for DW, and it's much appreciated. LWAMI definitely increased the value of DW. I'm talking more about additional SCS content such as new playables, new interfaces, and potentially a whole new game from SCS. These are things you can't provide. And only things SCS can provide. I'm just hoping DW isn't the end of the line.

And for Phullbrick. No matter about the SH series. It doesn't encompass as much as DW. DW is an ASW simulation in the modern realm. It can be played from air, surface, and sub-surface platforms. The sonar modeling is much more complex than the simplistic interfaces in SH. DW as such is a simulation. Where I consider SH a game. As I said before, it's MHO. Take it or leave it. And yes, I own both SH3 and SH4. And I prefer DW to both.

[Phullbrick]

And for Phullbrick. No matter about the SH series. It doesn't encompass as much as DW. DW is an ASW simulation in the modern realm. It can be played from air, surface, and sub-surface platforms. The sonar modeling is much more complex than the simplistic interfaces in SH. DW as such is a simulation. Where I consider SH a game. As I said before, it's MHO. Take it or leave it. And yes, I own both SH3 and SH4. And I prefer DW to both.

I believe you didn't catch what I wanted to express in my last post, my english I guess my fault :dead:

Ok let's try something else, take DW as it stands today, and put in it the graphics, sounds etc. of a modern video game such SH4, et voilà why do you get ?

a real hardcore simulation with the state of the art of technology, where all eyes go on

and miracle you just increased the general public interest, your sales perf, and your ROI :rock:

do you still think it as to be old looking and only attracting for a few to be a real hardcore simulation ? :hmm:

I don't think so and I don't think any company will earn money this way because if it was true 1,000 people would be talking on our Teamspeak every evening, DW would be #1 on the chart before LOTRO or Stalker, and we all know it's not the case I'm afraid and that was proven by the reaction of the people at the simulation shows where I was present. But that's just my opinion. ;)

vinegar and flies, it's all about :D I prefer Bordeaux 1998 or 1996 speaking for myself :D

[OneShot]

It most likely would increase sales if you had a modern naval simulation with flashy graphics and cool sound ... however the flipside of the coin would be simply a much larger number of people who buy the game, play it for an hour without getting good results and then shelving it forever. Initially you get lot more sales, but will those people buy another game from the same company ? Probably not. And because of the larger number of people who were dissapointed with the game you get a larger number of people who tell their friends ... "well, better not buy this game - looks cool but sucks playing wise".

As it is this game more or less only attracts a certain crowd who mostly come from one simulation or another and who are kinda different then your usual FPS/Script Kiddie. Sure they complain bout graphics, but mostly they are able to look beyond it.

And you shouldnt forget ... the small number of people who write on this board are only part of those who bought the game ... we can only guess about the number who bought the game and work it all out without comming here, or who shelve the game after some playing time (who of course dont come here too).

Just my 2cts.

[Lagger123987]

NEED MORE SUPPORT! Most of us need an esxtra ship, helo, plane, or sub to play on!

[OneShot]

NEED MORE SUPPORT! Most of us need an esxtra ship, helo, plane, or sub to play on!

*Sniff* just 7 platforms to fully master ... yeah I can understand how boring this must be ... just enough platforms to keep you occupied for one or maybe 2 hours and after that there is nothing more to learn and certainly no challenges. If the game would have just that one additional platform ______ (insert prefered class here) it would be a much better and more interesting game, actually why doesnt SCS release one new playable platform a week?

Cheers
OS

P.S. : Since some might not grasp it ... the above was pure sarcasm.

[Dr.Sid]

NEED MORE SUPPORT! Most of us need an esxtra ship, helo, plane, or sub to play on!

:rotfl:
Sorry .. it is really so funny.

[LuftWolf]

I still think that SCS should have released the seven platforms as individual simulations... then no one would complain that there aren't enough platforms to play! :rotfl:

Getting the platforms in one package is clearly too much of an overload for most people... "the most detailed sim of all seven platforms ever done in one package? clearly this is not enough for me!"

Cheers,
David

[Hawk66]

Regarding the wish of adding new plattforms: I don't wanna be a spoiler ;-) but I think the thread was about a SDK for DW.

You can add fancy graphics as much as you want, this simulation genre has no chance to attract the mass market. How many guys do you know (if they don't belong to the Navy or have jobs which are related to this topic) who are interested looking at radar gauges or watch a sonar display for hours?

World War 2 naval games are different, there is just more 'action' - that means you are able to shoot at your enemy more often and see instantly (more or less) the outcome ('nice' explosions etc.) of it.
In a naval sim which deals about the 'modern' times you often have to track your enemy for hours etc. and that's just not 'cool' enough for the majority.

So the only chance I see is to have a SDK. For SCS it's not worthwhile to add realism features or enhance the possibilites of the mission editor. With these kind of features they wouldn't get more customers as they have now. The casual user just does not take care about such things. But if I'm honest, I do not think it's wortwhile for SCS to provide a SDK too (from a financial point of view) :down:

[IotaSigma]

I happen to be one those people who bought DW when first released and still ENJOY it. I don't have time to play it as much as I would like to, but I still play. I am not in the Navy nor do I work for the Navy, yet I really do like DW. I realize it is not possible to make DW ubber realistic do to the top secret nature of modern weapon systems, and I am very happy just to get a "taste" of modern naval combat. :rock:

BTW I own SH3, but play DW (1.40 + latest lwami mod) more often.

[Sea Demon]

I still think that SCS should have released the seven platforms as individual simulations... then no one would complain that there aren't enough platforms to play! :rotfl:

Getting the platforms in one package is clearly too much of an overload for most people... "the most detailed sim of all seven platforms ever done in one package? clearly this is not enough for me!"

Cheers,
David

Well the problem with that is that their previous sim (Sub Command) had three playable nuke subs as it was. So you would at least need 4 to begin with. SCS is infamous for topping themselves from previous releases. I like your thinking though. Perhaps SCS could have made DW as a subsim only and just have the three nukes from SC and add the Kilo as a playable upon release. Then later add the "Aviation ASW add-on pack". Then a few months later release a "Surface Warfare: OHP add-on pack". Milk us with these new (already planned/funded?) releases along the way to build support and increase player/customer numbers.

Oh well. Water under the bridge...as they say. Sometimes I think it's getting increasingly harder to impress the rising expectations of sim fanatics. My opinion only. DW still makes me very happy. I'm just hoping, as I've said before, for more content in the future from SCS. After a few years with DW happily on my hard drive, I don't think that's hoping for too much.

[fatty]

It's strange, you know, Armed Assault is a realistic shooter completely open to community modding. Just look at all the awesome things that got churned out for Operation Flashpoint for an idea of what is to come. Yet the developers also make a version for military consumption, VBS2, which I believe is $1,500 a pop. The patches are still flowing so I assume they are doing all right with this kind of business model. I guess I will never understand SCS's logic but them's the breaks.

[OneShot]

It's strange, you know, Armed Assault is a realistic shooter completely open to community modding. Just look at all the awesome things that got churned out for Operation Flashpoint for an idea of what is to come. Yet the developers also make a version for military consumption, VBS2, which I believe is $1,500 a pop. The patches are still flowing so I assume they are doing all right with this kind of business model. I guess I will never understand SCS's logic but them's the breaks.

Well as far as I understand it BI just used the engine of OFP for VBS1, same as with the ArmA engine for VBS2 (or the VBS2 engine for ArmA?). While this makes those games/sims essentially compatible (VBS1 & OFP / VBS2 & ArmA) BI has added a number of features to VBS which make it very useful for gov customers (whole Observer and Wargame stuff and whatnot as well as possible code improvement).

Now SCS has done the same. Their basic engine which is used for Dangerous Waters and whatever they call their gov sims is the same. They continually develop and fix the gov version and sometimes we find those fixes in the commercial version as well. They allow modding to a certain extend, tho don't provide any tools (except the mission editor, and support for some community stuff) to actually mod.

Yep BI allows more modding, at least overtly. You can add more playable stuff to it. However while in DW a playable platform is the central part of the game, actually "is" the game, in ArmA it doesnt make a big difference if you have a german or us uniform, or a M1A2 or a Leo2A6 tank (I hope you get my point here). While their Pro product ... VBS does offer some highfidelity added playable content, the main modules as far as I have seen are things that are not in the game ... working artillery, Observer function and all the nice goodies the goverment needs in training its forces. SCS does the same ... the stuff thats really important is only done by them ... because thats where the money is.

Cheers
OS

[fatty]

It's strange, you know, Armed Assault is a realistic shooter completely open to community modding. Just look at all the awesome things that got churned out for Operation Flashpoint for an idea of what is to come. Yet the developers also make a version for military consumption, VBS2, which I believe is $1,500 a pop. The patches are still flowing so I assume they are doing all right with this kind of business model. I guess I will never understand SCS's logic but them's the breaks.

Well as far as I understand it BI just used the engine of OFP for VBS1, same as with the ArmA engine for VBS2 (or the VBS2 engine for ArmA?). While this makes those games/sims essentially compatible (VBS1 & OFP / VBS2 & ArmA) BI has added a number of features to VBS which make it very useful for gov customers (whole Observer and Wargame stuff and whatnot as well as possible code improvement).

Now SCS has done the same. Their basic engine which is used for Dangerous Waters and whatever they call their gov sims is the same. They continually develop and fix the gov version and sometimes we find those fixes in the commercial version as well. They allow modding to a certain extend, tho don't provide any tools (except the mission editor, and support for some community stuff) to actually mod.

Yep BI allows more modding, at least overtly. You can add more playable stuff to it. However while in DW a playable platform is the central part of the game, actually "is" the game, in ArmA it doesnt make a big difference if you have a german or us uniform, or a M1A2 or a Leo2A6 tank (I hope you get my point here). While their Pro product ... VBS does offer some highfidelity added playable content, the main modules as far as I have seen are things that are not in the game ... working artillery, Observer function and all the nice goodies the goverment needs in training its forces. SCS does the same ... the stuff thats really important is only done by them ... because thats where the money is.

Cheers
OS

Hi OS, thanks for your reply. I certainly do see your point - however in my mind if the military is willing to blow an extra $1450 a pop for VBS2 to gain an observer function and an AAR tool then it seems to me like they would do the same to pay for SCS' professionally built platforms rather than rip off our junky old mods :D

This topic has been hashed over so many times though and I respect SCS' decision none the less.

[XabbaRus]

Just so people know.

I have deleted a few replies here as they are essentially spam replies that offer nothing to the discussion here. If people have an issue with that send me a PM.

[LoBlo]

The thing that I would be most dying to do isn't create new platforms, but refining the audio, ship loadouts, and GUI for more realism. Most everything that I would want to do could be grouped into 3 categores:



Crew feedback modding to create more realistic crew audio1. Depth reached feedback ("My depth is XXX feet[meters]")
2. Firecontrol audio feedback: "Torpedo 1 is active, sir", "Torpedo 1 acquire!", "Weapon reattack, torpedo 1" (whenever a torp loses its contact (ie CM)
3. Raise/lower periscope feedback:"Up scope 1", "Down scope 1"
4. Run aground feedback (if depth to bottom < 20 feet) "Captain, keel depth less than 20 feet.
5. Impossible depth feedback "Captain, that depth would put us below crush depth sir." "Captain, depth is below sea floor sir"
6. Emergency dive feedback. "Emergency dive, 30 degree down angle!"
7. Waypoint reached feedback for subs. "Navpoint reached, comming left/right to course xxx"


GUI mods for more realism/functionality1. Broadband waterfall mod. Change the sonar BB display to be able to spherical array and TA at the same time (for example, setting the top to SA and bottom to TA) to make it possilbe to monitor both at the same time. Possible changing BB to a 4 display setup with left and right top SA (with ability to customize time scales) and left and right bottom TA.
2. Change platform sonar-profile library to behave more like the stadimeter (country menu dropbox) instead of linear scrolling
3. Make sonar profile library viewable even without a contact
4. Switch SW menus to be more efficent, less unneccesary/excessive clicking
5. More torpedo wire control options (depth, speed)
6. Emergency dive option in the navigation command menu
7. Waterfall display for the Gepard
8. No music when switching to the sonar suite (so that one can hear music on the other stations, but its automatically muted at the sonar station so to not interfere with sonar


Playable platform loadout changes for more realism, mainly the Akula ext tubes1. add a large long endurce CM (complete with fake sonar signiture and everything) to Akula's external tube loadout.


Actually, if I knew how to modify .dll files I probably would have done the audio enhancements to my own game. But alas, a programmer I am not... :(

[Bubblehead Nuke]

Good ideas LoBlo and more in line with the sim as I see it was envisioned.

I have always said that this is a tactical management sim and not one of micro-management.

The crew will tell you things, and do things to help you do your job. More crew feedback and auto reaction is one of the biggest things I think this sim needs. A Helmsman is NOT going to slam a 7000 ton sub into the seafloor at ahead 1/3. A Throttleman is NOT going to allow cavitation to occur unless directly ordered to by the OOD. A radio or ESM operator is not going to raise an attenna unless they know you are going slow enough. The crew needs to do ITS job so you can do YOURS. They WILL tell you when you are about to make a mistake.

I wish they would release to us some way to ADD the thing LoBlo mentioned. To be able to add voice commands would be nice. A scripting language for the crewmembers would be ideal. We give them an order and they run down a doctrine file before they do something. They either agree that it is a valid order and ackowledge accordingly, or they fire off some verbal feedback as to why you are about to make a mistake. You can use a scripting language to trigger crew reactions based on game inputs. A Chief of the Watch is going to climb the ballast control panel and throw the chicken switches (EMBT Blow) if you are damaged. It is in the SORM to do that and I would expect the CooW to do his job without input from ME. I might have other things on my mind at the time and those few seconds it would take for me to drop what I am doing and initiate the EMBT blow could be the difference from the sub surfacing or smacking the bottom.

Will these things dumb the game down? Not at all if it is implemented right. Command decisions would still require YOU the CO to give the order. Fire a Torpedo? YOU have to give the order. Want to do something that the crew doesn't agree with? Give the order AGAIN and the crew then gives you an Aye sir and does it, consequences be damned.. you ARE the CO after all. Just like the current mods, they would make the game much more immersive and informative when you have a crew giving you feedback.

Alas, I do not see SCS doing anything to allow us, the community, to fix some of the errors that we see or add major functionality to the game. Even if this functionality could be moved to the goverment contracted side of their business. We could be essentially free coders for them and that is the point that needs to be made here.

[OneShot]

I'd love to have those options mentioned by LoBlo and BubbleheadNuke. Would be great if the crew would give you more feedback. Tho I'd extend that to all the platforms ;)

Aside from that I'd love to see more functionality for the sensors the P-3 and the Helo carry. For starters ...
MAD/SAD actually relates to the depth of the sub, so I can use the output in conjunction with some formula or other (doesnt have to be the real thing) to compute the depth of the sub.
Some sort of TMA station where I can merge contacts ... actually just the option of merging contacts would be enough.
Larger Grams and true Doppler function ...
Templates for TACCO work, means for example you can push a button an place a set circle on the screen in the TACCO station where the AC should circle. Or Autocreate certain search patterns, stuff like that
Graphical Tools for the NavMap (sort like SH3)
True Maverick ... with the capability to use the Cam for targeting
Harpoons (including the correct interface)
Alas, there are more things on the wishlist, but that should be enough.

Bottom line, before introducing more playable platforms, expand or fix the capabilities of the existing ones. I don't need three planes which essentially do the same job, just under different names. One is enough, thank you ... as long as it really does the job it should.

Cheers
OS

[Lagger123987]

Need more support and someone is suppose to email the company that make DW to release a SDK for this 5 year old game.

[azn_132]

Need more support and someone is suppose to email the company that make DW to release a SDK for this 5 year old game.

I dont think ull get that much support tho.

[Lagger123987]

Need more support and someone is suppose to email the company that make DW to release a SDK for this 5 year old game.

I dont think ull get that much support tho.

YES I WILL! PEOPLE! VOTE FOR A SDK FOR DW!

[Kaleu. Jochen Mohr]

Need more support and someone is suppose to email the company that make DW to release a SDK for this 5 year old game.

I dont think ull get that much support tho.

YES I WILL! PEOPLE! VOTE FOR A SDK FOR DW!

SDK ?

and can i ask u to change your sig... it kinda iritate's me...

[azn_132]

Need more support and someone is suppose to email the company that make DW to release a SDK for this 5 year old game.

I dont think ull get that much support tho.

YES I WILL! PEOPLE! VOTE FOR A SDK FOR DW!

SDK ?

and can i ask u to change your sig... it kinda iritate's me...

SDK is the tools to make the game. And Lag's sig annoys me too.

[Kaleu. Jochen Mohr]

thanks to change the sig lagger... :up:

[caymanlee]

Can't believe some people vote "No"??!!!!:down: :hmm:

[Nexus7]

Can't believe some people vote "No"??!!!!:down: :hmm:

I cant believe this topic has gone so far... why don't directly ask them the source code :rotfl:

[SeaQueen]

The thing that I would be most dying to do isn't create new platforms, but refining the audio, ship loadouts, and GUI for more realism.

I like your ideas too. One of the things that immediately strikes me when I've been aboard warships is the sound. Adding more crew feedback would add a lot to the sense of activity in addition to being more realistic.

[Blacklight]

Give us the SDK !
Consider this signed ! :D

[Linton]

Isn't it about time that this petition was delivered to sonalysts so that they can act upon it?

[Dr.Sid]

Isn't it about time that this petition was delivered to sonalysts so that they can act upon it?

They have man visiting this forum time to time. I just guess they don't care about petitions. I wouldn't.

[Linton]

Unfortunately it is difficult ro convey irony in a post.I know that a scs chap visits from time to time but the chance of us getting this sdk are as good as me becoming the King of Great Britain!!

[Frying Tiger]

No, we get irony just fine. (grin)

We're still trying to figure out a way to get the company a return on any investment in addtional DW work.

The fact it's still slowly selling helps... naval sims may not be a big niche, but they have long lives! We're all grateful you're still having fun with it.

[Bubblehead Nuke]

No, we get irony just fine. (grin)

We're still trying to figure out a way to get the company a return on any investment in addtional DW work.

I do not have all the details on how DW dovetails into any of the other work you may do for the goverment. If DW DOES have some function in the goverment contracts then how about pitching it like I did earlier in this thread.

Alas, I do not see SCS doing anything to allow us, the community, to fix some of the errors that we see or add major functionality to the game. Even if this functionality could be moved to the goverment contracted side of their business. We could be essentially free coders for them and that is the point that needs to be made here.

I honestly would not like to see the ability to add new playables, but to be able to add things into the simulation to make it more immersive. Immersion is a HUGE factor in any simulation. We understand that giving us the tools you use to make things for DW, and that these tools may be for your goverment contracted projects, could be a violation of contracts and/or laws. How about giving us the specs so we could make our OWN tools or adapt others for the purpose.

As the mod community makes things, you may be able to move it over to the other side and save the R&D on coding & debugging. There is a large community of us ex-bubbleheads who play this sim and we could, and would, steer the modders in the correct general directions. We would not give away the secrets, but give them a good general idea to work with.

As the game is added to, then maybe others will come aboard and purchase the game. You have a GREAT starting point. Let us flesh it out! Let us build on what you started and bring it to the pinnacle of the SIM market.

You say that there is not much of a market for a sim of this type? I think you are wrong. I think it needs to be even MORE of a sim than it is. It needs to FEEL like you are there, giving the orders, listening to the crew react. People play sims like that to experience things they read about, see on TV, or listen to stories about. They want a slice, however small, of what they hear about or saw. Look at some of the other military sims out there. Those that are successful have the TONS of MODS and patches out there for them. Sometimes what generates the most sales is word of mouth. They need to see people talking about it, having their socks blown off by the sim. Then they buy it to find out what all the hype is about. That is what got me to buy Subsim 4, and I am not that much of a fan of the diesel boats. Let me tell you, without the mods, I would have uninstalled the game already. The mods make it MUCH more immersive and puts you in the action instead of just clicking a mouse.

You speak of Return on Investment. How much would it cost Sonalyst to let us do some serious modding? How much money can be made of using the simulation, fleshed out and modded to make it more immersive and useful as a training tool. How much time and effort would be saved if you had some ready made code available from some modder that addressed a new issue that a goverment contract required. Ammend the EULA to REQUIRE that any mod for DW be open sourced and all code and tools required in its making be FREE and all source code available. Who knows, maybe we will suprise you and make a better tool than you currently have. This way you can use anything created for your own purposes.

Thank you

[RedChico]

No, we get irony just fine. (grin)

We're still trying to figure out a way to get the company a return on any investment in addtional DW work.

The fact it's still slowly selling helps... naval sims may not be a big niche, but they have long lives! We're all grateful you're still having fun with it.

Thats simple unlock all ships and subs or allow us to unlock them.

Why? Its the current trend (the age of Mod). Perfect example: Rfactor.
Plus, as we are many and live in diferent countries, we would like to "drive" our national "toys", and not always the same boring US/Russian "toys" present in almost every sim.

Like myself i would like to "drive" a Meko2000 or a U212 type sub.

So what i'm trying to say its: today, a modable (sp?) game sells more than an unmodable one.


EDIT: oops i didn't even saw Bubblehead nuke's post, so... what he said. :)

[LuftWolf]

No, we get irony just fine. (grin)

We're still trying to figure out a way to get the company a return on any investment in addtional DW work.

The fact it's still slowly selling helps... naval sims may not be a big niche, but they have long lives! We're all grateful you're still having fun with it.

Well, it helps when the majority of possible buyers for such a product realize that Dangeous Waters is probably the first, best, and last multi-platform modern naval sim... unless they buy it. :)

So, it's not like anyone who suddenly decides they want to play a command sim focused on modern naval warfare has any other choice, or is waiting for some other product to come out.

So, patience young SCS grasshoppas... :rotfl:

Cheers,
David

[XabbaRus]

I'm just wondering if there is any point in continuing this thread since SCS aren't ever going to release an SDK. Our best hope lies with Dr Sid.

[Linton]

I wonder what the development costs were and how many have been sold?The Perry/P3 should have had a few different operating countries.It was basically a US/Russian oriented game.Perhaps more discussion with the community would have helped before they spent any $$$.I certainly do not remember any public discussion.

[MSgalileo]

What we need for immediate release is a standalone replay software or the format of the files so we can make a piece of sotfware by ourself.
I ask some months ago (April 2007) if SCS can release the format of the replay and I am still waiting an answer from Friyng Tiger (" I'll ask a coder and see what the deal is with the replay format. I have no clue if it's proprietary or not.").
I think if they can't give us the file format of the replay (a very strategic info:D) they never make a SDK.

[XabbaRus]

SCS has said many times in the past that and SDK won't be made available and given the lack of response from SCS here and at their own forum DW is no longer of interest to them. Therefore I think this thread is redundant now. Dr Sid is moving along with his sim which promises to be more in depth in the areas people have thought are limited in DW.

[Sea Demon]

Dr Sid is moving along with his sim which promises to be more in depth in the areas people have thought are limited in DW.

OK, I'm officially intrigued by this statement. What sim? Doc Sid......can you give us some more insight into your plans? I'm sorry, but I don't know anything about your planned sim and I'd like to know more about it.

[Sea Demon]

given the lack of response from SCS here and at their own forum DW is no longer of interest to them.

Are you totally sure about that? I certainly hope that's not the case. I'm still playing DW quite regularly and I'm still very much interested...so that would be quite disheartening if true.

[Zachstar]

When one's game is either failing and/or old then encouraging deep mods with a SDK or even the engine source code is one of the old tricks of the gaming industry.

Quake was a engine that went down in history as the most modified project in history. Its source code is still being tweaked and used today. It gave birth to Half life and its mods as well as its own rich modding community.

So DW diddnt sell big bucks... So what? Do you want your biggest public product to meet it's demise simply because you think there are bigger fish elseware?

I do not see what your big problem with custom playable craft are when you no longer support the engine. You no longer have any interest in making pay addons yet you want to deny a potentally great way to add in extra trickle funds?

Sad really :down:

[OneShot]

When one's game is either failing and/or old then encouraging deep mods with a SDK or even the engine source code is one of the old tricks of the gaming industry.

Quake was a engine that went down in history as the most modified project in history. Its source code is still being tweaked and used today. It gave birth to Half life and its mods as well as its own rich modding community.

So DW diddnt sell big bucks... So what? Do you want your biggest public product to meet it's demise simply because you think there are bigger fish elseware?

I do not see what your big problem with custom playable craft are when you no longer support the engine. You no longer have any interest in making pay addons yet you want to deny a potentally great way to add in extra trickle funds?

Sad really :down:
I suppose they are making still big bucks off DW ... tho not the freely available version of DW but the Government one which they sold to the DoD (amongst others).

So don't expect a SDK or something similar because they would shoot themselves in the foot by releasing such tools (their "other" customers would rightly think ... why pay huge fees when we can do all modifications ourselves).

So my guess ... DW is a success and still running, just not on the Retail market (i.e. where we can buy it).

[Zachstar]

I can hardly believe that the .gov is having to rely on SCS to provide them with new "playables". Matter of fact I refuse to believe this is the case because the critical info on these craft are highly classified.

So obviously DW for the .gov is a stripped down DW without the obviously wrong public domain info. This version is obviously designed for the agents in the navy to plug in the real numbers and run their simulations in secret.

I could hardly think the gov will suddenly find the public version. (Which obviously has added realism breakers so that the bad guys wont be able to suddenly use it anymore than SH3) More attractive unless they want versions they can send home with the cadets for practice. Again rather pointless cause SCS gets the money anyway.

[XabbaRus]

SCS is a govt. contractor, the DW we have from what I understand is the same as the Dod version but we haven't been furnished with details on that and an SDK would allow us to find them out.

So like I said is it worth having this thread. Gor ead the official SCS forum adn you will see there has been hardly any comment by SCS for the past 6 months.

[Zachstar]

Yes this thread is worth it as it is a public call.

[goldorak]

Yes this thread is worth it as it is a public call.

Ok, but if no one is listening ?
Are we going to shout in the desert for the next 3 years ? :shifty:

The best thing to do is follow Xabbarus advice, and concentrate as a comunity on the effort Dr Sid is doing. The naval equivalent to Orbiter. Now it doesn't sound to bad does it ? :p

I still play DW and have lots of fun, but its a dead end as a game without modding potential.

[Dr.Sid]

I guess this thread showed what the community wants. I think we won't get SDK, but I clicked 'yes' too. You never know. We have a nice 85% score, and as such the message is clear. We also know that SCS guy knows about this. So there is not much point in this discussion any more, except bumping it time to time so SCS knows we STILL want anything new.
I think we can do both. Work on community projects and praise for new commercial content.
I'll do what I do anyway .. even if SCS gave us SDK and 3 new games. And it won't by playable in multiplayer any much soon, so don't throw DW away. There is new LWAMI comming. And mission design too gets better and better. DW still is the best we have.

[JM850]

It would be nice, but wont happen.