Poll: FPS camera for sub walkthrough.

[jason210]

An accurate interior that you walk around would function as a virtual tour of a U-boat. It costs little in resource to implement, and if you didn't want to use it then it could be optional, like the free cam in SH3.

This is something I've been waiting for for years in sims, and recently I took the helm to get this feature into Ship Sim 2006. Ship Sim 2007 will have more walk abouts...

But what about SH4?

[The General]

Wow, I was just talking about doing this on another thead. More power to you Jason.

[jason210]

Wow, I was just talking about doing this on another thead. More power to you Jason.

Well, you suggested that someone should do a poll "thingy" in my other thread, so here it is!

[jason210]

Just out of pure curiosity, I'd be interested to hear the reason for a negative in this poll...

[Safe-Keeper]

The poll should've had more options. Like "I want an FPS camera, but not all compartments modelled", and so on.

Just out of pure curiosity, I'd be interested to hear the reason for a negative in this poll...Well, I voted for, although I'm sort of regretting it now, but:

It takes time from more important features.
After some time, you don't use it frequently anyway.
It can be pretty easily simulated by means of the Shift+F2 free camera.
It might simply not have that much of an appeal (seriously, there are more fun things to do than walk, run, and climb around in your sub).

[The Noob]

more fun things to do than walk, run, and climb around in your sub? Maybe insulting virtual people or shooting lifeboats? Sorry, but that part just sounded very, very sh*tty.

[cmdrk]

I give a qualified no to it. A FPS interface to reach every nook and cranny from stem to stern is just 'eye candy'. And, I suspect it would take more than a little development resources. Sure the modelers and programmer do different work, but they are all paid. Hmm, pay for another modeller or pay for another programmer?

Now, I would like more flexibility of viewpoint and FOV on the bridge, especially during close in navigation - docking and such. And, I've had a strong urge to look down from the bridge to see the gun crew in action. Also, US subs had a forward and aft TBT stations and a nice motion transition would be immersive.

[DeepSix]

...Now, I would like more flexibility of viewpoint and FOV on the bridge, especially during close in navigation - docking and such. And, I've had a strong urge to look down from the bridge to see the gun crew in action. Also, US subs had a forward and aft TBT stations and a nice motion transition would be immersive.

:up: Second that. Only reason to have an FPS cam for walk-throughs is if I could see something different each time I went into a compartment. The same visual repeated over and over again just seems like a huge waste of the devs time and mine. But for docking, gun action, etc. - sure, give me a few more alternate cams.

[jason210]

Only reason to have an FPS cam for walk-throughs is if I could see something different each time I went into a compartment. The same visual repeated over and over again just seems like a huge waste of the devs time and mine. But for docking, gun action, etc. - sure, give me a few more alternate cams.

The camera usage would be optional, so it wouldn't be waste of your time. The extra cost of developers time would be for 3D modelling, because more of the sub would need to be modelled. The extra polygons would also require more processing power. The programming logic required to apply an FPS camera is very simple.

FPS camera could open up new possibilities. Damage, for example, could be modelled realistically, such as leaks and flooding. Also, access to more controls, which might be fun. Walking aroud on the deck could also be advantageous, for example when docking or navigating in and around ports, or for milk cows etc.

[jason210]

Interesting to note that a large percentage of subsim crew are not in favour of this feature...

[HunterICX]

:hmm: I find the FPS thingy an sort of bonus....
I would prefer that the Devs focus themself on the more important things then walking around in the Sub.

I dont want SHIV be like the SH3 Stock game....

I prefer seeing a GW/NYGM Like SHIV

[DeepSix]

The camera usage would be optional, so it wouldn't be waste of your time. ...

Well yes and no. Yes, I could turn it off, but I still think it would be a wasted effort on the part of the programmers. Just my opinion though.

...Walking aroud on the deck could also be advantageous, for example when docking or navigating in and around ports, or for milk cows etc.

The U.S. didn't use milk cows.

Interesting to note that a large percentage of subsim crew are not in favour of this feature...

I have to comment on this. First, I can see 11 posts, and I'm the only subsim crew member among those. Second, I never claimed to speak for other subsim crew. I respect your wishes for a camera, I just disagree with it; fine if you disagree with me, but please don't put words in my mouth. No hard feelings here, just want to be clear. You may find another "subsim crew" member who does want a walk-through cam.

[Zero Niner]

I voted "No". I see no point, and the novelty will wear off pretty quickly if there's no functional reason to "walk around the interior of the sub".
The time & resources spent coding this should be put to better use.

[Hylander_1314]

Voted no.

Reason being, you're on a war ship, as the Captain. Your job is to command, and not wander about the ship making small talk, and looking at pinups in the enlisted men's quarters. Unless you want a vcup, and vcoffee to go with it. But you have no business running around the boat, like "Chief", unless you want the option to play that role, then you're just along for the ride, and take no real active role in the attack aspect as that's the job of the weapons Officer

[The General]

I had only just started playing SHII (late comer) when I first saw video footage for SHIII and I was gobsmacked. The leap in terms of graphics and playability was akin to the evolution of man from apes. I don't expect a technological leap of this magnitude from SHIII to SH4 but am very much looking forward to it nonetheless.

After playing SHIII for a year I have come to the conclusion that the key factor in one's immersion into the sim; and the abilitiy to suspend disbelief, is the level of detail in the 3D model of the uboat's interior and exterior and your movement around it. I recently discovered the use of shift + F2 to move more freely about the u-boat and thought that the next logical step for a Silent Hunter sequel is to model the entire sub, engine and aft torpedo compartments included and allow total freedom of movement throughout and increased manipulation of that environment i.e: valves, levers and switches that are interactive much like Microsoft's Flight Simulator. I also see no reason why rising water levels, during flooding, couldn't be rendered....

[STEED]

I voted, NO.

What a wast of time it would be.

[Safe-Keeper]

Also remember that the more compartments are modelled, the less detailed they'll be.

I'd rather the developers spent more time modelling the main compartments with flooding, gas leaks, fire, smoke, different animations for the crew present, crewmen scrambling through the compartment when crash-diving, and so on. It'd be so nice to order two men from the Forward quarters to the After Torpedo Room and seconds later watch them run through the Command Center. It'd be great to have a fire and watch a crewman take it out with an extinguisher.

Get the Conning Tower, Command Room, Radio Room, and Bridge modelled in superb detail, with every switch, lever, gauge, and so on being usable and tonnes of effects and animations. That'd do it for me by far (heck, the current setup does it for me by far:p).

[mookiemookie]

Waste of the developers time, I think. I'd rather they spent the time on something else... maybe animations for the crew. Climbing down the conning tower ladder when you order the sub to dive, or running to man the flak or deck guns when you order it. A full fledged FPS tour of the sub would be one of those "fun once and never use it again" type things.

Basically it all comes down to how to best utilize the limited developer resources in ways that add to the playability of the game, instead of eye candy.

[The Noob]

38 People voted Yes and only 12 no...so it seems many want it.

I want it. It's cool, it's realistic, it's just great. Waste of time? If this project would be under my command you would have to wait till Spring 2009 for that game. ;)

[Sailor Steve]

38 People voted Yes and only 12 no...so it seems many want it.
So a total of 50 voted, out of 16,000 registered users, 4,000 of whom were here in the last 24 hours (unless I'm misreading the statistics). It looks to me as though very few want it, or don't want it. Most seem not to care.

[HunterICX]

Actually, I Voted Maybe , but I,m more hanging to Not having this FPS in it

its an waste of time for something kiddies like to use to see...but after a time they wont use it anymore....so its an waste of coding, graphics and time.

believe me most Subsimmers want to see are more usefull features.

[The General]

Also remember that the more compartments are modelled, the less detailed they'll be.Why would this be the case?

[Sailor Steve]

Because each compartment for each sub has to be modelled separately, as they are all different, and it takes time to create each new compartment, or all the 'extra' compartments will be the same, as in generic.

I want to be able to crawl down into the battery compartment, or actually go into the head.:rotfl:

[Safe-Keeper]

And, of course, majorities aren't always right. Not to be rude or anything.

Why would this be the case?How would it not be the case?

The team has only so many people and each of those people has only so much time. There's no way they've got time to model each and every compartment in great detail with so much else to do (modelling landscapes, ships, people, weapons, and so on).

Either it's quantity, or it's quality. You can't have both.

Generic compartments, though? No problem. X-Wing Alliance was one of the games that did that. You could fly every fighter in the game, although there was a campaign only for the Rebel Alliance, and although every fighter but the Rebel ones had generic cockpits.

[jason210]

Interesting to note that a large percentage of subsim crew are not in favour of this feature...

I have to comment on this. First, I can see 11 posts, and I'm the only subsim crew member among those. Second, I never claimed to speak for other subsim crew. I respect your wishes for a camera, I just disagree with it; fine if you disagree with me, but please don't put words in my mouth. No hard feelings here, just want to be clear. You may find another "subsim crew" member who does want a walk-through cam.

Oh, I wasn't implying anything by that statement - it was just an observation. I was more wondering how you guys think than anything else!

[jason210]

Also remember that the more compartments are modelled, the less detailed they'll be.

I don't think that has to be the case. Less detailed than what? Not less detailed than SHIII. Video cards have doubled in power since SHIII. The question of where to focus resources can be applied to many areas. For example, external underwater views - there's a much stronger argument for not having this than there is for not having an FPS interior - what is the point in modelling something that basically the crew could never see?

[jason210]

Basically it all comes down to how to best utilize the limited developer resources in ways that add to the playability of the game, instead of eye candy.

What about underwater views? All those bubbles etc. Is that not eye candy? They'll be adding fish next.

[HunterICX]

Also remember that the more compartments are modelled, the less detailed they'll be.

I don't think that has to be the case. Less detailed than what? Not less detailed than SHIII. Video cards have doubled in power since SHIII. The question of where to focus resources can be applied to many areas. For example, external underwater views - there's a much stronger argument for not having this than there is for not having an FPS interior - what is the point in modelling something that basically the crew could never see?

If you read it right Jason
Detail: The Equipment in the sub, the boxes, thingies that are correct to the ones in real life. who wants a fake engine comparment that isnt correct towards the model in real life. to make those corresponded to the real model it takes a whole lot of work. so they rather focus on 1 Good and the MOST used comparment then the whole sub badly recreated. that would be the Commander Comparment.

same as with flight sims...why wouldnt they allow me to walk through a fully recreated Boeing 737 ? why cant I sit down on a passenger seat, or walk throught the cargo room? Why Would they? they take away the focus of the game. as a pilot you dont have time to walk around in ur plane when ur flying so why would they make it posible to do that? so the rather focused themselfs on the whole cockpit then the whole plane.

[Safe-Keeper]

I don't think that has to be the case. Less detailed than what?Less detailed than they'd be if there were fewer compartments.

OK, let's say the devlopment team has 1000 hours (just to get a round number) to spend on compartments.

Only the command centre, radio/sonar room, conning tower, and bridge: 1000:4. 250 hours to spend on each.

Every compartment in the sub: 1000:10 or something, or 100 hours for each. Far less. Which in turn equals less detail for each one.

Video cards have doubled in power since SHIII.That has absolutely zilch to do with anything. Only one compartment is shown at a time, independent of outside eye-candy. Perhaps unless your sub gets a really big hole in it:p.

[jason210]

I don't think that has to be the case. Less detailed than what?Less detailed than they'd be if there were fewer compartments.

OK, let's say the devlopment team has 1000 hours (just to get a round number) to spend on compartments.

Only the command centre, radio/sonar room, conning tower, and bridge: 1000:4. 250 hours to spend on each.

Every compartment in the sub: 1000:10 or something, or 100 hours for each. Far less. Which in turn equals less detail for each one.

Video cards have doubled in power since SHIII.That has absolutely zilch to do with anything. Only one compartment is shown at a time, independent of outside eye-candy. Perhaps unless your sub gets a really big hole in it:p.

Video cards do play an important role. The latest, state of the art chipsets can render more triangles, and have more memory, which means larger more detailed interiors can be displayed. The interiors can still be split up into compartments and rendered seperately, seamlessly. I don't see how there can be any serious limitation of graphics due to computing power. The only sound argument is the man hours one.

I understand what you mean about man hours. There is limited time and you'd rather see that time put into developing other things, rather than researching and modelling an interior. Fair enough - what you say is reasonable. But think about all the time they must have put put into developing that outside view, making those realistic underwater effects - that is also just "eye" candy, unless you are using that view to dodge depth charges.....:-?

[HunterICX]

:-? Underwater camera and comparments are 2 different things, as I refer to Flightsims you can see external there...but why not allowing people to walk throught the whole airplane?

very simple, if ur a pilot focus on the flying. as an Submarine commander focus on navigation, targeting, making decision and controlingthe submarine.

the underwater camera isnt really special thought, you got the sub and the animations of the bubbles and screws. not that hard work.

but why argue about it? I want a SubSim, and I want to command a sub, I dont want to drool about the seeying an diesel compartment fully working, I want to focus myself and I believe many more subsimmer on the Game itself. I want to sink ships as much as posible. its a greater importance that the Devs of SHIV focus more on the important features of the game to make the game itself succesfull for the Subsimmer then for 13+ kids that wants too drool inside the submarine because he likes to see the cilinders of the diesels going up and down.

[jason210]

:-? Underwater camera and comparments are 2 different things, as I refer to Flightsims you can see external there...but why not allowing people to walk throught the whole airplane?

very simple, if ur a pilot focus on the flying. as an Submarine commander focus on navigation, targeting, making decision and controlingthe submarine.

Well, what if the pilot wants to go to the toilet?

External scenery is important in flight sims because that is wha the pilot sees. In a sub, you see the interior, not the exterior. So there is no sound argument for modelling exterior underwater views, whereas modelling an interior does have an argument, because this is what you see when you are in a sub.

Why ask me why argue about it - because there are arguments for and against! :)

[Safe-Keeper]

In a sub, you see the interior, not the exterior.Whereas as a pilot in a plane, you can suddenly see the plane from the outside, flying past you? That's new to me.

Underwater external views for subs are as unrealistic as aerial external views for planes.

[Sailor Steve]

I think his point was that the pilot can see the outside from within his cockpit. The submariner sees nothing but the interior, unless of course he's on the bridge.

All external views are bogus, but people seem to want them. I understand the desire for more interior compartments being modelled; I just don't agree with it.

[Payoff]

All of the compartments forward of the command room are the same in SHIII, from the type VII to the XXI. They all have the same radio/sonar shack and captains cabin (which looks a little silly in a type XXI) but it serves its purpose, and those compartments are functional. I think generic compartments would be o.k. as long as we can have functioning gauges and maybe some additional crew. It would be neat to stroll through during a depth charging, and check on the boys. Or under heavy damage, perhaps the captains presence could add a little motivation in the form of crew efficiency.

[The General]

I think his point was that the pilot can see the outside from within his cockpit. The submariner sees nothing but the interior, unless of course he's on the bridge.

All external views are bogus, but people seem to want them. I understand the desire for more interior compartments being modelled; I just don't agree with it.How, as you've stipulated so eloquently above [that the submariner spends most of his time inside the pressure hull], can you justify there not being more compartments to walk through? Are you some kind of sadist? The crew have it tough as it is, why do you wanna restrict them to only the middle, and by no means the largest, compartments of the boat?

Anyways, all you people who don't like evolution are losing the poll by a considerable margin, what does that tell you?

[Drebbel]

Anyways, all you people who don't like evolution are losing the poll by a considerable margin, what does that tell you?

It tells me that many people do not realize that there are 3 types of lies:

1) Lies
2) Dang lies
3) Statistics

:D

It also tells me that the people who want a FPS interior in the boat have forgotten that the budget for this sim can only be spent once. Therefore creating a FPS environment inside the boat means something else will be stricken from the to-do list, or something else will be done with less of attention/quality.

Only in highly rare cases additional budgets might be made available to include an additional feature and pospone the release date. Like for instance the dynamic campaign in SHIII. And we all know that the absence of a FPS environment inside the boat will not cause the uproar that the absence of a dynamic campaign did.

It also tell me that you do not realize the you always get a mojority when the poll ask weather the sim should included an additional cool and nice feature.

How about a poll how important an FPS ebvironment will be on a scale from 1 to 10 ? That will result in a much more balanced view.

Drebbel


PS: Statistics have proofen that gates at railway crossings in Holland are always closed. I checked it myself, I traveled around my country for a whole week to gather the data. Oh, btw, I travelled by train :D

[jason210]

...its a greater importance that the Devs of SHIV focus more on the important features of the game to make the game itself succesfull for the Subsimmer then for 13+ kids that wants too drool inside the submarine because he likes to see the cilinders of the diesels going up and down.

I think that's great for kids. To show something how it really was, and stimulate their interest in technical things. But then I again, I work with virtual reality - and see it as an educational tool.

[Sailor Steve]

How, as you've stipulated so eloquently above [that the submariner spends most of his time inside the pressure hull], can you justify there not being more compartments to walk through? Are you some kind of sadist? The crew have it tough as it is, why do you wanna restrict them to only the middle, and by no means the largest, compartments of the boat?

Anyways, all you people who don't like evolution are losing the poll by a considerable margin, what does that tell you?
I didn't say I could justify having more compartments; I said I didn't agree with it. I don't feel a personal need to walk into the torpedo room or the the engine rooms. Of course I didn't feel a personal need to see the crew standing around, either, but I wouldn't want to live without them now. I've even complained that they aren't all represented (no helmsman). Long ago I said I would be happy with something akin to Aces Of The Deep 2, with updated graphics and sound.

[The General]

Speaking of how it should be done have you guys looked atthe trailer for PT Boats: Knight of the Sea? It looks awesome! I hope the boys wotrking on SH4 are taking notes.

Drebbel you're a smart dude and I admire your work, but I don't think I'll be that hard to do a full interior. You just get someone to work on generating 3D models for various parts e.g. pipes, valves, lights, switches, hatch-doors. You know, generic stuff, that can be utilised again and again in the different types of sub. You must admit it'd be cool to walk into the engine room and hear those engines going hell-for-leather at flank speed or see the crew loading torpedoes into their tubes.

[Drebbel]

It will be hard. Because besides a complete 3 D model you are also expecting crew members to do stuff. You just wrote you even expect to see them loading the tubes. ;)

Of course it will be cool. But personally I prefer those resources used for other stuff.

[NEON DEON]

38 People voted Yes and only 12 no...so it seems many want it.
So a total of 50 voted, out of 16,000 registered users, 4,000 of whom were here in the last 24 hours (unless I'm misreading the statistics). It looks to me as though very few want it, or don't want it. Most seem not to care.

Gee. That is almost as bad as voter turn out in California on election day:D

[Safe-Keeper]

You must admit it'd be cool to walk into the engine room and hear those engines going hell-for-leather at flank speed or see the crew loading torpedoes into their tubes.Which is why I'd like fewer compartments: More detail. Quality over quantity.

Imagine if the Ubi people have actually modelled every compartment of every sub. They must be reading this thread and going "Noooooooooooo...":p.

Anyways, all you people who don't like evolution are losing the poll by a considerable margin, what does that tell you?That most people want it. Of course, numbers of supporters says nothing whatsoever about whether or not it's a good idea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum).

[The General]

Imagine if the Ubi people have actually modelled every compartment of every sub. They must be reading this thread and going "Noooooooooooo...":p.Ha,ha, ha! That was funny. You and Drebbel make some good points. It's all academic anyway 'cos the developers have said they're not making anymore compartments, so you guys will end up being right by default.

[jason210]

Imagine if the Ubi people have actually modelled every compartment of every sub. They must be reading this thread and going "Noooooooooooo...":p.Ha,ha, ha! That was funny. You and Drebbel make some good points. It's all academic anyway 'cos the developers have said they're not making anymore compartments, so you guys will end up being right by default.

We don't have to have every compartment modelled in order to have an fps camera...

[Dantenoc]

I think we are confusing the issue here... Since most of us aren't game programmers we tend to forget of how rendering a 3D world works. One might be tempted to think (as an example) that adding walk about capabilities to existing rooms in SHIII was somehow too expensive and resource intensive, and that Ubisoft was justified in not adding that feature to SHIII. Likewise, the mere though of doing something equivalent in SHIV is also just as completely out of the question.

But we seem to forget the reality of it all, and that is that: SHIII already has 99.9% walk-about capabilities coded in it, so any detriment in the games quality or performance that we fear has already happened wether we realize it or not.

* Fearful of getting a hit in your frames per second? ...already happened
* Fearful of modelers wasting many hours modeling stuff that very impatient players wont take the time to apreciate? ...already happened
* Fearful that the extra resoruces needed will make the game more expensive? ... already happened
* Fearful of starforce eating your baby? already happened (Ok so I'm going a bit too far :lol: )

If we think about it: when we press F2 to go to the command room view, what do we see?.... a first person camera view of a complete, 3D modeled, submarine interior (or at least a room, but your brain doesn't know, it can easily imagine that there is a whole sub beyond the walls... inmersion:yep: ). In this room we can turn around, look up, look down... we can do anything except walk about... but wait! if we press shift-F2 we can walk about, and can now see the interior of the room from all sorts of different angles. And then we start to notice that all the dials work (well, for the most part and after extensive fixes from the modders) and heck!: you can even hover over the nav-map and see that it actualy works! (it has on it all the different drawings and anotations that you've made a while back when you were on the F5 screen)

So as we can see, the computer is already hard at work doing everything (and then some!) needed to render the 3D world that so many of us want but yet some of us fear. Only very minor fixes, like not permiting the player to pass through walls and such are needed... perhaps one day's work for a somewhat competent programmer is all that is needed? I can live with Ubisoft postponing the release for one more day, can't you? :yep:



Now, on a completely different discussion inside of this thread: should they add more rooms?... more rooms :hmm: ... well, that is another matter. Here we are talking about working more than previously done in SHIII. You know what?, I don't care either way. It would be cool to have them, and have something to do on those very long long voyages, runing around the whole sub like a complete Bernard (you know you want to :rotfl: ) or we could just stick to maintaining the equivalent of the rooms that we already have in SHIII. Either way works great for me.

to sum it all up: for a somewhat decent FPS experience, we don't need to add new features, just finish the ones that are already 99.9% done :up:

[DaMaGe007]

Exactly right dantenoc, I also think that when your at 32x speed the interior should still run at 1x speed, speeding up all the models looks stupid and must use some extra recources.
I would also like compartment flooding, hl1 had it 6 years ago...cant be too dificult...
moving functioning crew would also add great imersion.

[jason210]

* Fearful of getting a hit in your frames per second? ...already happened
* Fearful of modelers wasting many hours modeling stuff that very impatient players wont take the time to apreciate? ...already happened
* Fearful that the extra resoruces needed will make the game more expensive? ... already happened
* Fearful of starforce eating your baby? already happened (Ok so I'm going a bit too far :lol: )

to sum it all up: for a somewhat decent FPS experience, we don't need to add new features, just finish the ones that are already 99.9% done :up:

Well said. An fps camera is no big deal - as you say it's already there - just needs a few minor changes to get it going.

As I said, no big deal, but once there after a while people are going to start wanting to be able to visit other compartments, and press buttons and pull levers. May be that's what the fear is.

For me, I'd be happy to open doors and go up ladders. Both these extra functions do require some programming.

[Safe-Keeper]

Your point? "This game's already system-extensive and I think they're already spending too much time on eye-candy, so it's OK to make it even worse"?

Great logic, that.

to sum it all up: for a somewhat decent FPS experience, we don't need to add new features, just finish the ones that are already 99.9% done :up: Sorry, but last time I checked it was 0% done. A free camera and the ability to walk around the submarine are totally different things.

As I said, no big deal, but once there after a while people are going to start wanting to be able to visit other compartmentsWe've already got tonnes of people asking for the whole damned sub to be modelled.

and press buttons and pull levers.Er... You already can:-??

[Sldghammer]

Waste of resources that can be spent in other more important areas.
Such as better online play.

[cmdrk]

To me it is a matter of priority. Taking SH3 current mix of game engine, AI, dynamic campaign, user interface, and 3D graphics as a base, what do you want to see advanced to the next level and in what order.

The AI and campaign is what I want to see enhanced first. Then once there is a solid game foundation, lets expand the 3D world and work in 3D user interfaces.

BTW, I agree a free floating camera (basically the modellers development tool) is not a FPS make. There is all that object collision detection to take care of. How much programming work that involves - I'm not sure, but one day's work seems to be an optimistic estimate.

[Deamon]

Jason210 you gonna love my sim :)

Free FPS walking is THE central feature in my sim around that i build all the rest.

I think that free FPS walking is a question of taste. The one prefer a tactical subsim( interiours and FPS unimportant ) and others who preffer the immersive submarine experiance of being on board( interiours and FPS very important ).

Someone remember this ?:

http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/heinrich/Media/Videos/VIIc.avi

It thrills me over and over again! It feels so much more real.

I definately preffer the latter one cose that gives me the ultimate immersion and opens up a very different way of handling the sub, it's not just for eyecandy. It actualy can have alot of functionality. However i feel to share my experiance about it as a developer...

In a sub, you see the interior, not the exterior. So there is no sound argument for modelling exterior underwater views, whereas modelling an interior does have an argument, because this is what you see when you are in a sub. ...Well, implementing and testing an exteriour view takes maybe one hour , implementing full sub interiours with free FPS walking inside takes an eturnety. You first have to research the interiours of your sub, means find the information and study it. This can take even longer than the modeling itself!

I started to research and model the interiours of one of my subs and after two years i still was nowhere near a completness. But one reason for that was the slow and difficult research progress.

Why ask me why argue about it - because there are arguments for and against! :)
A question of preference. I think in developement there should be a curtain ratio of effort spending betwin the important und "unimportant" features. Else it will never be the unimportants turn.

Cheers,
Deamon

[Dantenoc]

I think that free FPS walking is a question of taste...

I definately preffer the latter one cose that gives me the ultimate immersion... It actualy can have alot of functionality...

... implementing full sub interiours with free FPS walking inside takes an eturnety. You first have to research the interiours of your sub, means find the information and study it. This can take even longer than the modeling itself!

Excellent, a very well balanced and educated remark from someone who appears to have some knowledge on the matter :up:

Deamon is absolutely correct in pointing out that most often than not, the research stage of a modeling project is the hardest part of all. To put it simply, you can't model what you don't know. In that regard Ubisoft needs to be congratulated, for I think we can all agree that the U-boat interiors were researched enough to be acurately represented in full 3D in SHIII... well, at least some rooms. In other words: if you can free-cam around the command room, then that means that Ubisoft knows the command room. They know how it looked like, they know it's dimensions, they know the objects and people that were inside it, they know how they were aranged, etc. etc... or at very least they knew enough to fake the rest and be convincing about it.

So I think it's safe to say that the lack of research was NOT what prompted the decision to exclude a walk around feature from the already modeled rooms in SHIII, and it will most likely NOT be the deciding factor for it's inclusion or exclusion in SHIV either :) .

What other major hurdles are there when building a Virtual Reality experience? Basicaly just two:

1) A potent graphical engine that can render said 3D room in real time on your computer. Although this is indeed very hard work, it has already been done in SHIII. The free cam is ample proof of this.:yep:

2) Making said virtual world interactive. Again, a somewhat tricky part that does require hard work. For a basic but yet satisfying VR experience, you only need two things: a) make the objects inside the room clickable, and b) have them do something meaningful when you click them. The radio and hydrophone stations are ample proof that neither requirement is beyond Ubisofts capabilities. Even the command room is somewhat interactive when you realize that all the gauges, the officer, both maps and all three hatches are clickable... it doesn't seem like it because most of them just don't do anything meaningfull when you click on them. The gauges are notorious in this regard, for they only display their names when you click on them. One very simple solution to these "non-interactive" gauges that would take very little time to implement is to have them lead you to a close up look of them when you click them, and that close up could then be clicked upon on different spots to issue relevant orders. All the code needed is already in SHIII (the gauges on the hud are interactive, just associate this behaviour to the already clickable gauges in the command room)

So, again, all the hard work has already been done. Ubisoft should dedicate a small amount of time to finish what they started, and at the same time go and work on all the other stuff that is also so important to the gaming experience (like a decent user's manual, better scripted behaviour for the computer controled ships or a better campaign :yep: )

[Deamon]

There are maybe some more things to point out. When working on interiour simulation you kinda open pandoras boxes. The question is also to which extent do you want to model the interiours. Indeed when you model the sub interiours completely then there is indeed the question what do you need it for ?

So you need to give to all this extra room funcionality to justefy the extra effort. Making the knobs work is maybe not enough. Becose indeed most players won't make any use of it. So you maybe should make the crew moveable, so that you can for example command things like: "All hands to the bow" now the sailors rushing to the bow to get the sub down while you can stand in the controlroom and look at them through the bulk head in to the bow compartment. This for example would be a real function of this rooms. But that means you need to develope a traffic system that stears all sailors and make them evade obstacles and each others. You might need to animate them so far that they go and lay in the bunks and get up later to take over the watch.

Making the crew moveable opens the next pandoras box, what if the sub is in very heavy seas and rocking and rolling like hell ? Now when the sailors move through the sub they will move like it would be calm see!

That would look silly right ? So you would need to take this in account too and make the animation system so flexible that they tumble in heavy seas and move slower, bang and fall and injure them self. You see you end up biting you self in the tail. All this is a BIG extra effort. And hey what about torpedo reloading animations ? In heavy seas maybe ? Ahahaha

That were just a few examples. Usualy when you start to develope something you run in to troubles that you haven't forseen. Only when you start to develope you become aware of the actualy ammount of trouble that you have to deal with. You end up falling behinde the shedule and should i tell you how such stories end ? With generous feature cutting :rotfl:

Oh, and all the extra polys of the extra compartments might make it neccesary to make alot of rendering optimization so that it can run fast enought on average hardware.

And should i tell you what ? Despite that i'm going to make it! :88)

So when you going to include all compartments you would need to include the whole tail that it pulls behind it, in order to make it sense. So maybe it would be good to start humble and allow the player to climbe in to the tower when ordering to dive instead of simple switch the camera in to the controlroom and allow him to move inside the tower and controlroom freely. My point is when you'r going to do it then you should do it right or leave it better alone.

But if you could succed to implement all this then you could also implement all the authentical operational proccedures with speeches and stuff. Then the driving allone would be awesome, i imagine!

Would be worth an dedicated release. Just an u-boat trainer with comprehensive trainings scenarios where you can drill your crew and stuff. That is basicaly what the first releas of my sim will be about. That's how i imagine the optimal sim. And i will find no rest until i have implemented all this.

Deamon

[jason210]

There are maybe some more things to point out. When working on interiour simulation you kinda open pandoras boxes. The question is also to which extent do you want to model the interiours. Indeed when you model the sub interiours completely then there is indeed the question what do you need it for ?

Excellent Daemon! You're dead right of course. Once you make the interior, how do you make it functional? Well, for starters I said all I'd want is ladders and hatches.
Oh, and all the extra polys of the extra compartments might make it neccesary to make alot of rendering optimization so that it can run fast enought on average hardware.

That's easy stuff. You can have collision-activated selector based on your position in the sub. Onlt the compart you are (and the adjacent ones) are rendered.

Making the crew moveable opens the next pandoras box, what if the sub is in very heavy seas and rocking and rolling like hell ? Now when the sailors move through the sub they will move like it would be calm see!

True - it would need a good collision solution - if not some simple physics simulation. I don't know what the current 3D engine uses.

You have some very good points and it's easy to tell your're a developer. Of course - research is the most time consuming aspect. Having spent over a year researching the Titanic for Ship Sim 2006 I know where you're coming from. What 3D engine are you using?

[Deamon]

Excellent Daemon! You're dead right of course. Once you make the interior, how do you make it functional? Well, for starters I said all I'd want is ladders and hatches.

Yes, much like in Leifs video. That would be good already.

Oh, and all the extra polys of the extra compartments might make it neccesary to make alot of rendering optimization so that it can run fast enought on average hardware.
That's easy stuff. You can have collision-activated selector based on your position in the sub. Onlt the compart you are (and the adjacent ones) are rendered.

But there is the case where all hatches are open and you can see throught them. lets say you stand in the aft compartment and look through the opened hatches right to the bow. You might need to make lods of compartments that consist only of ditails that are visible throught the hatches or you pick up an engine that is capeable of removing the stuff that cannot be seen anyway seemless. And of course when you add the crew than each compartment have alot more polys.

But once i'm done i can surly tell you.

Making the crew moveable opens the next pandoras box, what if the sub is in very heavy seas and rocking and rolling like hell ? Now when the sailors move through the sub they will move like it would be calm see!
True - it would need a good collision solution - if not some simple physics simulation. I don't know what the current 3D engine uses.

Not only that you would need to make at least two different versions of many or all animations, one for calm seas and one for heavy seas where they move around like drunk, strugeling to keep nalance.

You have some very good points and it's easy to tell your're a developer.

Oh thanks for the flowers :|\\

Of course - research is the most time consuming aspect. Having spent over a year researching the Titanic for Ship Sim 2006 I know where you're coming from.

Oh realy ? Than you can surely appreciate of what i do.

The researching about WWII u-boats is unequaly better than researching WWI boats. When researching german WWII u-boats you have at least museums that exhibite a TypVII a type IX a type XXI and a type II somewhere and lots of good plans and manuals. But from WWI u-boats only fragments remain. But i must say after 3 years i'm in a damn good position to achieve something very authentical.

What 3D engine are you using?

http://www.ogre3d.org/

Cheers,
Deamon

[Dantenoc]

Errr... :-? ... I don't want to seem like I'm flip-floping my position on this issue, but I feel the need to clarify my previous statements in light of some newer posts. We all want the perfect game some day, and I applaud your efforts in constructing one of your own. However, being realistic, and staying within the context of SHIV, I don't think that we'll see any revolutionary programing from Ubisoft for this next instalment. Best that we can expect form them is to finish the half developed code already embeded in SHIII and maybe a few minor details added into the game. I have little faith that they'll be abel to do much more beyond that.

Now, that may seem as a sour or condesending remark (towards Ubisoft), but not at all, that is not my intention in any way. I firmly beleive that if they realy did manage to finish and round off al the "only hinted at features" that they didn't manage to fully complete for SHIII, then I think they'll have an instant classic in their hands.

Basic things like substituting the "teleport from room to room" paradigm for one of walking about in each room, with climbing ladders and clicking on hatches to go from room to room would go a long way in the creation of more inmersion. Likewise, diminishing the importancer of the HUD interface in favor of more functional gauges and officers would make a very nice and significant change for the better.

Anyway, we all agree that we want a better game, and I hope Ubisoft is taking notice of our interest in their product.

[Stormfly]

just my 2 cent...

did you notice that free 3D roaming in vessels get more and more important ?

...look at the addon developers of Flightsimulator, planes with walkable cockpit + cabin is just a normal thing (using Active Camera or similar addon), together with company´s like Natural Point, you can even put your head in the game using TrackIr :rock:

...a totaly new feel of simulation, your just inside, its simply amasing. :sunny:

And I can tell you, i never would fly again without it !

stormy

[Steeltrap]

Considering this from a different angle:

Would you prefer a "FPS walkabout" feature allowing free movement through the sub, or SHIV to ship without the many issues found in SHIII (and dealt with to the best of their considerable abilities by modders post launch)?

Put that way, I couldn't give a hoot about moving around in the sub. I spend almost all my time in the map & personnel (and crew management takes FAR too much time as a % of sim experience, something we all know) screens in SHIII unless actually engaging targets.

I'd prefer they add to what is able to be seen to change IN compartments - damage, flooding, crew working on damage if (and extra if a damage control team assigned) - rather than my ability to walk around in them.

An interesting discussion, as always. I find different views and reasoning fascinating, irrespective of my opinion of them. One of the real strengths of this place!

[jason210]

just my 2 cent...

did you notice that free 3D roaming in vessels get more and more important ?

...look at the addon developers of Flightsimulator, planes with walkable cockpit + cabin is just a normal thing (using Active Camera or similar addon), together with company´s like Natural Point, you can even put your head in the game using TrackIr :rock:

...a totaly new feel of simulation, your just inside, its simply amasing. :sunny:

And I can tell you, i never would fly again without it !

stormy

I did notice. You should check out Ship Simulator 2006 as well. It has a detailed Titanic model you can walk about on ;-)

Somebody earlier in this thread said that those who don't want the an FPS camera will end up being right by default, since he seemed to know that the developers wouldn't be doing this for SHIV. Perhaps this may be true for SHIV - but I think in the long run, FPS simulations in transport will be a standard in simulation games. It's the next natural step in immersivity, and I think we've waited too long for it.

[jason210]

I'd prefer they add to what is able to be seen to change IN compartments - damage, flooding, crew working on damage if (and extra if a damage control team assigned) - rather than my ability to walk around in them.

Arguably that would be just as hard to fix as a simple walkabout, which after all, demands nothing more than the functionality of hatches and doors and a simple collision model. Extra modelling for more compartments, is optional. I'd be happy for now just to see the existing rooms accuratised, and to be able to walk around those.

It is an interesting discussion and there seems to be two very definite camps here. On one side, we have the VR people, who want to get all immersive, and on the other side are the tactical people who want to sit in front of panels á la DW.

I like both kinds, but VR type games are most fun I find. One of the best games I have ever played was Operation Flashpoint, basically a virtual battlefield simulation that allowed you complete freedom to get in various NATO and SOVIET vehicles and undertake non-linear missions. That game is still playable today, 5 years after it came out.

Research is the biggest difficulty though. Imagine a warship simulator, set on a Destroyer, for example, where you could choose to be various crew members. Now that would be something completely new. Not quite feasible yet, but this type of thing is coming. Mark my words :-)

[Safe-Keeper]

Extra modelling for more compartments, is optional.You really think that'd do less for the game and be more "optional" than walking about the sub - which you already can with Shift+F2?

It is an interesting discussion and there seems to be two very definite camps here. On one side, we have the VR people, who want to get all immersive, and on the other side are the tactical people who want to sit in front of panels á la DW.Strawman. Just that we don't find it important to walk around the sub doesn't mean we want to "sit in front of panels". We want 3D compartments as much as the next guy.

Imagine a warship simulator, set on a Destroyer, for example, where you could choose to be various crew members. Now that would be something completely new.We've got Destroyer Command, so it wouldn't be new, no.

[jason210]

Extra modelling for more compartments, is optional.You really think that'd do less for the game and be more "optional" than walking about the sub - which you already can with Shift+F2?

Tha main argument against doing an FPS seems to be that the time spent doing could be better spent developing logic and gameplay, instead. So my point here was that introducing an FPS camera does not need to be a big deal, in terms of developer time and resources...

The SHIFT + F2 is a floating camera, not a walk simulator with gravity, footsteps and collision detection, with animated hatches and ladders.

Imagine a warship simulator, set on a Destroyer, for example, where you could choose to be various crew members. Now that would be something completely new.We've got Destroyer Command, so it wouldn't be new, no.

Perhaps I didn't explain that well. What I meant was a ship with an FPS camera and where the player can interchange roles with AI crew members, so you could walk around as any key crew member, and do your stuff. This is a concept I've had a wish for, for a long time. A whole Destroyer modelled - everything from turret interiors to radar control centre. Wouldn't that be cool?

Destroyer command is station based, and dated, and pretty dull, although I always liked the game. You can read my review about it at gamespot (Jason210).

[Deamon]

Perhaps I didn't explain that well. What I meant was a ship with an FPS camera and where the player can interchange roles with AI crew members, so you could walk around as any key crew member, and do your stuff. This is a concept I've had a wish for, for a long time. A whole Destroyer modelled - everything from turret interiors to radar control centre. Wouldn't that be cool?
Yeah and we are working on it. :)

http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/heinrich/Forumtemp/S23_1.jpg
http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/heinrich/Forumtemp/S23_2.jpg
http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/heinrich/Forumtemp/S23_3.jpg
http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/heinrich/Forumtemp/S23_4.jpg
http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/heinrich/Forumtemp/S23_5.jpg
http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/heinrich/Forumtemp/S23_6.jpg

I just feel like you and have the same wish since a long time. We don't care we are just going to do it :)

Cheers,
Deamon

[Deamon]

It is an interesting discussion and there seems to be two very definite camps here. On one side, we have the VR people, who want to get all immersive, and on the other side are the tactical people who want to sit in front of panels á la DW.

There is often that argument that most of the time people play it on the map anyway. However if there would be an realistic map implemented, that means without realtime GPS and when the player would have to update the position on his own or by his navigator who is in turns dependant on the weather to get a fix, the situation might change significantly. People would suddenly like to go out on the bridge and try to approach some navigational features near the coast to assure the correct position. I can't stress enough the implementation of an realistic navigation.

Imagine you go to the map station set the time compression to max but there's no u-boat icon that moves by magic hand.

I like both kinds, but VR type games are most fun I find.
I think they are most complete, and most real. VR lets you experiance the war in a non abstract manner. It's actualy you ass that's get blown away. Priceless! :D

That feeling of being right in the danger, dare to risk your life all that feelings and excitement of real combat. Man how much i love it. All this emotions that you have to cope with and still in need to thing tacticaly surrounded by emotions.

One of the best games I have ever played was Operation Flashpoint, basically a virtual battlefield simulation that allowed you complete freedom to get in various NATO and SOVIET vehicles and undertake non-linear missions. That game is still playable today, 5 years after it came out.
Yup, my all time favoured :)

Research is the biggest difficulty though.

;)

Imagine a warship simulator, set on a Destroyer, for example, where you could choose to be various crew members. Now that would be something completely new. Not quite feasible yet, but this type of thing is coming. Mark my words :-)
;);)

Cheers,
Deamon

[jason210]

There is often that argument that most of the time people play it on the map anyway. However if there would be an realistic map implemented, that means without realtime GPS and when the player would have to update the position on his own or by his navigator who is in turns dependant on the weather to get a fix, the situation might change significantly. People would suddenly like to go out on the bridge and try to approach some navigational features near the coast to assure the correct position. I can't stress enough the implementation of an realistic navigation.

This is what simulation is all about. Great stuff if you can pull it off. But then it's no longer a game, and the games market and games publishers aren't interested. Are you the guy who is using Ogre3D?

[jason210]

Had a look at your website Daemon - very impressive models. I guess you'll need to use some sort of rendering switching mechnism, so that all those detailed interiors and instruments aren't sent down the pipeline at the same time?

[Deamon]

This is what simulation is all about. Great stuff if you can pull it off. But then it's no longer a game, and the games market and games publishers aren't interested. Well, you can implement realism options of course. But if you are employed, and the project is limited by budget and shedule then it might not get into the game. But we are an indi team we aren't affected by this stuff. We just do the sim of our dreams. But we have to be more humble in the overall bulk of the sim though. I developed a special concept that allows me to focus on realism and immersion stuff in the first place that usualy get skiped by the other projects. Immersion and realism is almost the sole emphasise in our project. For immersion i have also my own special ingredients. I'm sure you will like it at the end.

Are you the guy who is using Ogre3D?That's correct!

Cheers,
Deamon

[Deamon]

Had a look at your website Daemon - very impressive models.
Thank you but this models are rather simplified. I don't even publish the realy impressive stuff. I don't want to teas the folks to much :)

The finished models will rock the house(and the hardware specs :lol:)

I guess you'll need to use some sort of rendering switching mechnism, so that all those detailed interiors and instruments aren't sent down the pipeline at the same time?
Well, i will have to go at great lengths to optimize the rendering. The interiours of U 1 are currently arround 500k polys. When it's finished it might be well around 750 - 1000k polys. But i will make heavy use of mesh instancing and batching since there are so many identical parts. So at the end the actauly polycount will shrink to just a fraction of what it is now.

Of course i will switch off the interiours when the player goes outside. And there are of course other measures to optimize the rendering. Besides loding the interiour, for the case when all hatches are open and you stand in the bow or stern and look through them all the way to the other end, where you see the ditails at the other end from further away anyway, the not visible parts of a compartment that cannot be seen through the hatch can be removed but might require additional lods.

There are planty of measures to reduce the rendering requirements, including billboarding compartments at the other end of the boat :)

I will see then. In the case of U 1 it's even easier, the doors of the control room are displaced, so that you cannot look from the stern in to the bow anyway. Of course when the hatches are closed the compartments behind them don't need to be rendered.

But be warned even then will IUF be not meant for low specs. I sacrifice even that for immersion, realism and authenticity. I think it will render smooth at the end but i expect the memory need will be high, in order to store all the LOD's and textures. I want to create a sim that is as timeless as Red Storm Rising, that i still play today :)

I believe at the end it will be something very special.

Deamon

[jason210]

But be warned even then will IUF be not meant for low specs. I sacrifice even that for immersion, realism and authenticity. I think it will render smooth at the end but i expect the memory need will be high, in order to store all the LOD's and textures.

Good. When I buy a new game these days I expect it to kill my computer. Publishers demand that games can run a wide a range of computes as possible, so they have a wide market base and can sell more. As a result developers working for them get told that the minumum specs have to be low. Like probably now it's for a 3D game they moved up to the 128MB graphics card. Last year in the project I was working on, the publisher had demanded 64MB min, Graphics memory, which just screwed the textures.

What's batching?

So you are in a envious position if you are developing it without a publisher breathing down your neck, with deadlines and restrictions...

[Deamon]

Good. When I buy a new game these days I expect it to kill my computer. Publishers demand that games can run a wide a range of computes as possible, so they have a wide market base and can sell more. As a result developers working for them get told that the minumum specs have to be low. Like probably now it's for a 3D game they moved up to the 128MB graphics card. Last year in the project I was working on, the publisher had demanded 64MB min, Graphics memory, which just screwed the textures.
I feel sorry for you guys. :) But at least you get paid for that. Hey didn't knew that you work in the game industry. I thought you teach grafics ?

On what typ of games have you worked ?

What's batching?
The problem with grafics hardware is it doesn't like entities. You can maybe render a 1.000.000 poly object smooth but when you render 1000 x 1000 poly objects it will go down on it's knees. This is becose each entitie have an minimum required overhead no matter how much polys it have. It's the same polycount but 1000 times more overhead. You see my point ?

So devs come up with batching what is basicaly a technique to treat many objects, lets say 100, as one and save 100 times overhead. This is especialy important in combination with instances to save polys and overhead.

A typical example in my case are for example rivets. I have for example several rows of rivets of the same type along the torpedo magazines. So i have just one poly rivet and the other 200 are just instances of it, saving 200 times polys. But now i have 200 entities and 200 times the overhead :-?

Now i could make them all from polies and merge them in to one entite but now i have 200 time more polies. :-?

Here's where batching come in to play. So i can make my 200 entities of that rivet and batch them together in to one entite, now saving 200 times the polys and avoid 200 times the overhead.:)

Another good example are forests in games. You have ALOT of trees, thus ALOT of entities making your hardware go down on its knees. So the standart trick is to batch the trees so that the forest consist not of single trees anymore but of tree chunks lets say of rectangular 10x10 trees and maybe 10x10:2 triangular chunks so that we can make the edges of the forest look more natural. However we cannot batch to many trees in to one chunk cose each chunk gets rendered even if just partialy visible so we have to balance betwin the size of the chunks and their ammount, becose we want trees that are outside of the screen not be rendered to save render resources.

There is a downside however. For example you surely have noticed in Operation Flashpoint that you can knock over single trees with a tank but can't knock over trees of a forest. This is becose the trees of a forrest are batched :)

So you will have to knock over the whole batch(what would look total silly) or not at all.

I thought you would know this.

So you are in a envious position if you are developing it without a publisher breathing down your neck, with deadlines and restrictions...
Yes, and i'm VERY happy about it. I maybe can't spend all day with it but i can do just what i deeply desire. I can do what comes from my heart and exactly in the way i like it. I mean that's self-fulfillment. I will bother later about the market and harware requirements. At all, till i'm done with the first release, in 5 years maybe, there will be a big performance shift of hardware till then anyway. So the hardware requirements are just relatively high. When i'm done they will be maybe just average. I have an AMD 3000 with 1 GB ram and Geeforce 6600 that i will replace later with a 7900 or what is the newest till then and an additional GB ram and will try to optimize it so far that it will run smooth on this system.

Deamon

[AS]

Hi everybody,

So if the external camera is unrealistic and the interior is unimportant ("because a captain had to command and not to walk around") than why not make SHIV a text-adventure like in the good old times of the C-64? This would save a lot of man power and the DevTeam could concentrate on Super AI.

Cheers, AS

[Lionman]

I give a qualified no to it. A FPS interface to reach every nook and cranny from stem to stern is just 'eye candy'. And, I suspect it would take more than a little development resources. Sure the modelers and programmer do different work, but they are all paid. Hmm, pay for another modeller or pay for another programmer?

Now, I would like more flexibility of viewpoint and FOV on the bridge, especially during close in navigation - docking and such. And, I've had a strong urge to look down from the bridge to see the gun crew in action. Also, US subs had a forward and aft TBT stations and a nice motion transition would be immersive.

Please don't take this personally, but regarding the second and third sentences of your quote above.

I have been flying, fighting, tanking, sailing and submarining in combat simulators since well before the internet existed and have lost count of the number of times I have heard the same people dismissing everything that represented progress and enhanced realism and immersion in all those realms as "mere eyecandy" and/or a "waste of resources. This is 24 carat TOSH! Therse are exactly the same folk who claimed in the previous IT generation that graphic user interfaces like Windows itself were "a waste of resources and mere eyecandy". Presumably they would have been happy in a DOS world for ever! LOL The same guys who wanted to keep sliderules in the top pockets of their white coats because "calculators are a bad thing and make people lazy." (I bet there are some on this Forum old enough to remember them!)

Luckliy for all of us, for the gaming world, and for the plethora of social, civilian, military, airforce and naval simulators and their massive influence on operation and training within all those realsm, those at the cutting edge have always ignored these backward looking voices. Gaming drives the cutting edge of computing, always has and always will. But for gaming the Pentagon would not have remotely operated air or ground vehicles in its armory, there would be no "smart" bombs or missiles, and there would have been immeasurably more ground, sea and air casualties in every major conflict the US and NATO has entered. Even infantry and tank crews are now trained in simulators with huge savings in money. injuries, fatalities and training time.

Gaming is driven by everyman seeking vicarious experiences that are either unavailable to him or her in real-life, or which could involve potential fatality or injury.
This includes all forms of combat, all forms of aviation, all forms of motor racing and many kinds of travel. This is a market that is literally endless and bottomless for the developers and which will accordingly always make them money. Thank goodness, as that's the only thing that ever motivate the business world to provide us with what we want or need.

"Mere eye-candy?"

Personally, I look forward to the day (and believe me, it's coming) when my in-game avatar in every kind of simulator will bear my own face, animated in real-time-sync with my own voice through my headset mike; will be able to wear the clothes, uniform, equipment and insignia that I choose, will be able to walk in fps mode, up to my virtual racing car, motorcycle, tank, aircraft, ship or submarine, climb aboard, open the cockpit or hatch, climb in and explore the interior to any degree I like in FPS mode. When my avatar will be able to parachute out of my damaged or burning plane, steer my chute, ride all the way to the ground, land, roll, run for cover, search for contacts, or stealthily make my way through enemy lines, all in FPS view. When I will be able to leave a sinking sub and head for the surface using my submarine escape apparatus, in FPS mode, note the shoals of fish before I surface and climb up a scrambiling net onto a recovering vessel. I want surround sound backgrounds with directional noise. I want radios that work and can be tuned virtually, my turning the dial, to virtual, historically accurate radio stations and command base broadcasts.

NONE of this is "mere resource-using eye-candy". ALL of it IS the means to attain the more and more comprehensive sythesis between actuality and virtuality that makes a simulator maximally immersive, entertaining and potentially valuable as a training environment for almost any imaginable group. Remember this "the battle may be virtual but the experience is always real"!

Also bear in mind that soon gamers will be clamouring for the "physics engine" cards that will enable 40,000 objects to be tracked and maintained instead or 40, with out making any demands on CPU cycles. Bandwidths and processor speeds and RAM are all increasing and always will. All we need to ensure is that the developers have a constantly-updated, detailed wish-list, of our collective priorities

I mean why didn't we stay with radio? With clay pots and open fires? With one colour overalls instead of fashion, with horses instead of bikes and cars, or cleft sticks and message runners instead of the telephone? There Victorians who said "Nobody sensible will ever bother to use the telephone" and there were people back in the late 1930's who considered TV "mere eye candy" too! In a huge number of instances those folk were unimaginative financiers who didn't want to back progress because they were afraid of losing their money.

Times have changed and it is now a buyer's market; the more immersive and realistic it is, the more likely we all are to buy it. This also fules the development of computers and all their peripherals, a whole consumer-based industry of increasingly huge import in global markets. Good news for everybody all round.

So if you consider immersive detail "eye candy" or "uneccesary" then I suggest you are "swimming in the wrong ocean" as OURS (the world of simulations in virtuality of actuality) is all about maximum immersion and realism, literally, metaphorically and historically! THAT is what creates the maximum intensity of experience for us all.

So I vote a resounding YES for maximum immersive realism in every feasible way ASAP.

Hell, I want to be able to sit on my virtual bunk, leaf through my virtual 1940's copy of the POST and read a virtual article about my virtual sub and crew, while drinking virtual coffee of a brand I chose, from a virtual cup whose contents I see dissapearing when I raise it to my lips! Interruped by the (directionally accurate) sound of a battle alarm, throw down my coffee and mag, and sprint down the virtual corridor to the control room and my station, or climb the conning tower ladder and be soaked by virtual water as I open the hatch as we surface!

Seriously though - please stop the "waste of resources" litany and the "mere eye-candy" nonsense! <yawn> Or go play SH II on Windows 98!
(Hi folks- Drebble - Sailor etc - if any of you remember Lionman!)

[Sailor Steve]

Of course I remember you; I still have the picture of you with your ship in drydock.:rock:

As for dreams of total immersion, I'm waiting for the helmet that turns with me as I look around my fighter-or race car-cockpit, letting me see what I really would see in that situation.

@AS: my only problem with the external cam is that I can't keep myself from using it. Of course it has to be there; just teach me how to keep my hands off!

[Lionman]

Great to hear from you Steve! I agree about the racing helmet, especially with Track IR 4 Pro and GTR 2!

Nobody has yet ever considered a saturation diving simulator, probably because 99% of the planet will have no idea what that is! But I sure would love to be able reprise bell-runs in virtuality. Trouble is the only way to make that into a "game" would be introduce 'shark attacks' and explosives planting and <gasp> real construction diving missions which in the first case would be totally unrealistic and fictional and in the latter cases "just like work". One could however model exciting and realistic 'diving emergencies' and operations conducted in stormy conditions. A perfect training aid for the commercial offshore oilfield diving industry too! However there seems to be vast global market for civilian flying simulation and I even have a friend who runs his own virtual cargo airline and flies real-time virtual cargo delivery flights all over the world, so who knows ,maybe there IS a market for an oilfield saturation diving simulator? LOL

Seriously though, I have long been absent from this forum mainly due to excessive immersion in the realm of FPS WW2 infantry combat simulation with a Clan of over-40's reprobates including several ex-and serving USMC guys, one serving decorated US cop, a retired scientist and their assorted sons, grandhchildren and even a grandmother of 63. (I am 60 now) So our member's age range spans 53 years! Named by me the "Grey Guard" our website is http://www.greyguardclan.com/ we started with Call of Duty, moved on to COD United Offensive, and now play Call of Duty 2 on our server. Along the way we have made forays into Battlefield 2 and myself and one other GG member regularly play Red October too online. If you check out the "Mission Statement" I wrote on the website you'll get the idea. Meanwhile I am still WW1 combat flying sporadically in RB3D with the RAC and on Hyperlobby in WW2 aircraft in Forgotten Battles with both them and former members of my WW2 squadron, the Butcher Bird Brotherhood. (BBB=Fw 190) Plus of course compulsive writing in a wide variety of Forums all over. Hope you and yours are all OK and happy.

[don1reed]

I voted no.

I would rather see the devs invest in a fully functional (all the sirens, whistles, & bells--split image range finder) of a WWII kollmorgen periscope.

[Sailor Steve]

Hope you and yours are all OK and happy.
Well, there is no "mine" as I've been divorced forever and my kids are grown and gone. As for myself, I haven't played any games of any kind, having been homeless for several months now.:rotfl:

I laugh because I've been working at several odd jobs and may have something permanent lined up; I won't know for a few days. My only real complaint is not being able to play SHIII, especially with GWX about to be released. Hope I have it all together before SH4 comes out.

[Lionman]

Hope you and yours are all OK and happy.
Well, there is no "mine" as I've been divorced forever and my kids are grown and gone. As for myself, I haven't played any games of any kind, having been homeless for several months now.:rotfl:

I laugh because I've been working at several odd jobs and may have something permanent lined up; I won't know for a few days. My only real complaint is not being able to play SHIII, especially with GWX about to be released. Hope I have it all together before SH4 comes out.

DUH to me for forgetting! Forgive my ignorance but what is GWX?
Let's hope the other options turn out well for you Steve.

[3Jane]

Perhaps in the museum section it might be interesting, depending on how much of an extra load it might add to any machine running SHIII(GWX):p. In the actual boat on a patrol it wouldn't add anything.

[Sailor Steve]

Forgive my ignorance but what is GWX?
Grey Wolves eXpansion. They've been working on this supermod forever, and the people who are currently testing it have nothing but praise.

[Lionman]

DUH! Of COURSE! <I knew that> LOL I know it and it is very impressive.
:arrgh!::know: :up: I have a huge selection of MODs to my SH III and I think the range of MODs available and on the way is one of the many indicators of its supremacy in its field.

[TinCan]

It would be cool to have but would rather see development time spent on
"wolfpack" attacks, more ships & subs, being able to command Jap subs, sub against sub attacks when the enemy is surfaced as per Silent Hunter, more dynamic ship events when torpedoes hit such as the bow blown off, eventual capsizing and a host of other events.


I voted don't care either way.

[manucapo]

it would be a nice function but how much would the enjoyment last
maybe for some people
but i spend most of my 1x time in the sound room with my ear nailed to the hydrophone

[Capt Jack Russell]

I'm all for more compartments especially if you could visit them during time compression. But they have to have contain unique functions. I like that idea of a card game in the ward room while listing to 40's music.

[Sailor Steve]

Umm...another ressurected zombie poll thread!:down:

Please note that the last post on this thread was dated three months before the release of SH4.:dead:

[Reaves]

Sorry people but i'm sick to death of people talking about "it's only eye candy."

If I didn't want eye candy i'd still be playing Silent Service on a blooming Commodore 64!

I was playing last night and as I was hiding from a DD dropping can on me I spent my time looking around the command room. I then thought how cool it would be if the free cam was modeled so it's a more immersive feel, like you're actually walking around the command room. I then thought how great it would be to have THE WHOLE SUB modeled. I know it's a bit much as development time could be spent somewhere else but if a company made an add-on for SH4 that modelled the entire sub interior in 3d i'd be buying it ASAP.



R

[Lionman]

Sorry people but i'm sick to death of people talking about "it's only eye candy."

If I didn't want eye candy i'd still be playing Silent Service on a blooming Commodore 64!

I was playing last night and as I was hiding from a DD dropping can on me I spent my time looking around the command room. I then thought how cool it would be if the free cam was modeled so it's a more immersive feel, like you're actually walking around the command room. I then thought how great it would be to have THE WHOLE SUB modeled. I know it's a bit much as development time could be spent somewhere else but if a company made an add-on for SH4 that modelled the entire sub interior in 3d i'd be buying it ASAP.

R
Ditto - I'd order it tomorrow! One of the things about simulation is how it varies from realm to realm. Witness the cranky old fashioned avatars in IL2 1946 - another thing that really annoys me about Oleg's simulators and MS FSX are the empty cockpits, passenger and crew compartments and looking down to see that you have no legs, are in an empty pilot's seat and have no hands or feet on the moving pedals and stick. This is ELEMENTARY realism yet flight simmers have swallowed it for years! I want to look down and see my flight suit wrinkle as I move the rudder pedals, and see the watch on my writst keeping real time as my hand operates the stick! That is FAR more crucial and basic than pictures of the girlfriend stuck to the control panel! Yet each simulation realms seems to get fixated only on the realism of certain areas. IN IL2 the pilots turn their heads as they bank yet "in-cockpit" they aren't there at all! Weird and it ruins the immersion.

In LOMAC and F4 Allied Force one's avatar has legs but no hands ansd the feet don't mirror rudder movements. I mean just how complex is it to write a software emulation of control movements and apply it to a cockpit avatar?

I too am absolutely sick of hearing people dismiss all these things as "mere eye candy" - I guess these are the same folks who wanted to stay with DOS back in the day "because GUIs are wasteful"! Thank goodness we ignored them or we'd still be using slide rules and wouldn't even HAVE computers! LOL

I want to see the crew avatars sweat and roll their eyes heavenwards during a depth charge attack, I want to see men praying and hear muutered curses with every impact - THAT'S what real life is like in that situation. Just modeling leaks doesn't cut it. Creating great software is an ART FORM not an engineering job to be scripted by marketing men and accountants!

. . .& if there are any company marketing men or accountants reading this, rmember that people will pay FAR MORE for great art than for engineering! Come on you developers you are in the same business as holywood - you are recreating myths and making dreams real . . . . not to mention honouring the warriors of history. Give us really great art and the money will come flooding in. Example - Red Baron 3D - a decade old and STILL played by a global community. Classics LAST in any medium.

[Reaves]

^^^

I always like B-17 the mighty 8th because of the detail of the crew. If you moved your tail gunner to the navigators chair you would see him walk through the plane and into the new position. THAT was probably the greatest sim i've played because of the immersiveness. The problem is the graphics are dated and it doesn't have the same effect that it used to.

[Capt Jack Russell]

Count me in too!! I'd buy it in a heart beat. It would be great to go to the engine room to see men repairing an engine or actually fixing the deck gun on the deck!

[joea]

Umm...another ressurected zombie poll thread!:down:

Please note that the last post on this thread was dated three months before the release of SH4.:dead:

Some people are....:88)

[Dowly]

http://omglol.kerrolisaa.com/1/8979.jpg

[Lionman]

^^^

I always liked B-17 the mighty 8th because of the detail of the crew. If you moved your tail gunner to the navigators chair you would see him walk through the plane and into the new position. THAT was probably the greatest sim i've played because of the immersiveness. The problem is the graphics are dated and it doesn't have the same effect that it used to.
I agree, I really loved B-17 The Mighty Eight and agree that it was awesomely immersive, indeed I still have it on my (1 TB) HD although I haven't played it in ages.

I once made the mistake of naming my whole B-17 crew after my own friends and then flying a long haul Berlin raid in real time. After many hours (I paused it for meals!) I was totally wrung out. We got badly bounced by Me 109s on the way in and Fw 190s on the way home, ending up shot to bits with only two live engines, limping home at low alt. I tried really hard (I was the pilot) to get us home in one piece but we were too low to jump and so when we didn't guite make it home and ditched in the channel with the loss of all hands, I felt really bad for days! As if I'd let my friends down. Now THAT's immersive!

There have sometimes been rumours of an updated multiplayer version with a co-op mission structure and if that ever happens it will be a killer sim to die for. It had the most intuitive and user friendly sim interface I have ever seen in an air combat game. Also you could play it as a crew management game and in that way it was a very similar recipe game-playwise to SH III and IV. All in all a fantastic package and a classic, way ahead of its time.

[V.C. Sniper]

I want to walk into the torpedo room and watch the men load them big beautiful Mark 14 torpedoes, and then go to the engine room just to listen to them mighty diesels sing its beautiful song.

[Lionman]

I want to walk into the torpedo room and watch the men load them big beautiful Mark 14 torpedoes, and then go to the engine room just to listen to them mighty diesels sing its beautiful song.

Hell I want to lean over the table in the torp room and watch the poker game! LOL

Also think of local sounds changing as you walk through the boat - fragments of music - conversation - engine note change, hissing valves, deck plate footsteps, flushing heads, laughter . . . . . . in a word, the sub-sea "ambiance"!

[Capt Jack Russell]

Totally agree! This is the stuff that makes the game for me. I just took a break from SH4 while the 1.4 upgrade gets sorted out. Went back to SH3. I prefer the U.S. and the Pacific but ... I rediscovered the micro management of the crew, the great cut-away view and repair icons and best of all ... the movement through that little boat!! It's great. Sure it's only (2) horizonal rooms plus the capt'n bed. But it feels like so much more when compared to SH4. I'd pay for more sub and micro management in a heart beat!

[TheSatyr]

I wouldn't buy it. If they put that much work into a sub's interior than it would mean that they didn't put alot of effort into other parts of the game.

It's simple. Sub sims don't make alot of money and I'd rather see the money spent on game play,not on eye candy I'd only look at once or twice.

If you want FPS,then go play an FPS game.

[Hanzo]

I wouldn't buy it. If they put that much work into a sub's interior than it would mean that they didn't put alot of effort into other parts of the game.

It's simple. Sub sims don't make alot of money and I'd rather see the money spent on game play,not on eye candy I'd only look at once or twice.

If you want FPS,then go play an FPS game.

Typically unreasoned response. Who is saying they want a first person shooter? I want a submarine simulator.

I think it's quite clear that having the ability to walk around within your sub would only add to the immersion factor (one of the reasons I, and a lot of people, play SH4 in the first place - atmosphere). Saying that dev-side wouldn't be able to focus on other aspects just because they put effort into making interiors is more than generalising. Currently, we have all these wonderfully modelled interiors in SH4, yet we stand locked in the middle staring at hardly animated mannequins. It's meant to be a submarine simulator, so surely you would agree that the more realistic interior interaction is, the closer it'll get to the real thing? That's the point of simulation after all.

Immersive, interactable interiors are something I hope the SH series will incorporate in future iterations, for sure. :ping:

[Lionman]

I wouldn't buy it. If they put that much work into a sub's interior than it would mean that they didn't put alot of effort into other parts of the game.

It's simple. Sub sims don't make alot of money and I'd rather see the money spent on game play,not on eye candy I'd only look at once or twice.

If you want FPS,then go play an FPS game.
Typically unreasoned response. Who is saying they want a first person shooter? I want a submarine simulator.

I think it's quite clear that having the ability to walk around within your sub would only add to the immersion factor (one of the reasons I, and a lot of people, play SH4 in the first place - atmosphere). Saying that dev-side wouldn't be able to focus on other aspects just because they put effort into making interiors is more than generalising. Currently, we have all these wonderfully modelled interiors in SH4, yet we stand locked in the middle staring at hardly animated mannequins. It's meant to be a submarine simulator, so surely you would agree that the more realistic interior interaction is, the closer it'll get to the real thing? That's the point of simulation after all.

Immersive, interactable interiors are something I hope the SH series will incorporate in future iterations, for sure.
Here here! I totally agree. I am so fed up with hearing that tired old "it's only eye candy so why bother" line. Indeed if such people hadn't been ignored for the last two decades, why would we have bothered with ANY graphics at all? We all still be playing board games and using computers only to do accounts and word processing!

As for all this tosh about "using up resources", in a submarine simulator you have ONE single interior to model, not a whole small town of buildings complete with furniture in every room, pictures on the walls, opening doors, coke cans that roll, trees, bushes, birds and grass ALL of which move independently, as you have in any decent modern FPS like ARMA, COD2,COD4, Airborne or Soldier of Fortune:Payback. Surely the modelling of the ocean, which is very similar to weather modelling and mainly a matter of dynamics and classes of motion, cannot be more CPU-intensive than modelling a whole jungle (as in CRYSIS) with every leaf and tree animated and realistic physics when bullets hit them? Not to mention transparent animated water that you can swim in and under as in Far Cry and CRYSIS!

IMO it has far more to do with the "compartmentalisation" of the gaming industry. What do I mean by that? Well, combat flight sim designers have got into the habit of not bothering with anything like enough realistic ground detail, Civilian flight sim designers go crazy for ground & aircraft detail but exclude firing weapons and still use laughably poor and unrealistic avatars for pilots and ground staff, while nobody in that design realm seems to think it odd that they are on the tenth version of MS FS after nealry 25 years and have modelled the whole earth and almost all its passenger airlines but all the planes and cockpits are still TOTALLY EMPTY! Meanwhile in our beloved submarine realm, although avatars are finally approaching the quality of some FPS games, (I hated the gargoyle-like SH III Avatars) we STILL remain tethered to very limited immobile viewpoints in the interior of our subs and the crew appear rooted to the floor! That just means the 3D space has replaced the 2D backdrops of the original Silent Hunter's 1 and 2, which is not much of an advance for a decade.

The first games design house to combine the first person mobile immersion of an FPS simulator with the weather and ocean modelling of a civilian flight sim or sub sim, plus the action dimension of combat, will sweep the market. I want to be able to walk to my aircraft, or up to my submarine by the dock, climb into the cockpit or climb aboard, into the conning tower, open the hatch scramble down the ladder into the sub, pulling the hatch shut after me and I want to see my knees in the cockpit, or my feet when I look down while walking through the sub and my hands when I open hatches or grasp aircraft controls. (Speaking of which have you all noticed that THE hardest thing to model totally realistically in avatars or real robots, is the human hands! They ALWAYS give away the AI nature of the beast, well so far at least. Even "Real Dolls" - Google for it - ruin their amazingly realistic glamour girls with hands whose fingers just don't look right.)

Other than the luddite throw-backs who "still can't see why we stopped using DOS" and the Grinches who think everything that aids immersion most is "just eye candy", the rest of us ALL want ever increasing realism and so, eventually, it WILL happen. We just have to be patient and keep on asking for it in Forums like this and making intelligent and feasible suggestions for improvement.

Imagine being in a sim sub in combat, but able to run down the corridor closing watertight doors behind you, as light fittings shatter and the bilge water sluices around your feet with the rolling of the sub, then climb ladders between decks or into the conning tower! i.e. SH IV is already an awesome piece of work but it is NOT the end of the line. The thirst for ever more photographic realism, more complete physics (debris that rolls with the ship, bodies of the injured and dead that fall to the deck and move with the ship's motion) more realistic ocean and subsea environments, is unending. I forsee a time when it all WILL be "photo-real" with ALL these functions implemented and we will look back to these days of lego-brick avatars in FS2004 and FSX flight crews, and "animated dummy" crews in our subs, with hilarity and shake our heads, wondering how we "maintained immersion" with such clunky features.

As for the financial dimension, just look at the accelerating figures of internet usage and online gaming. I started using SKYPE when there were less than 1 million using it and I rmember seeing 1 million plus and being surprised. Recently I have seen 9 million on SKYPE at once! This is never going to go "backwards", there will just be more and more people, joining faster, so this is an almost bottomless market because "virtuality" is not only a WHOLE NEW MEDIUM but an "infinite" one in terms of population space, as virtuality, like the human imagination, has no end and is perhaps the first TRUE "infinite space" ever. Well virtually. LOL

This is a non-trivial issue because we gamers DRIVE the (increasingly VAST) PC development industry, which in turn drives the military and civilian use of simulation, and the spin offs for other realms, such as CGI, GPS, medical imagting etc. Ad infinitum. (My youngest daughter is currently engaged in a medical degree and the incredible medical imaging of the whole body inside and out now available for the training of medical undergraduates has come directly from the gaming industry's avatar modelling.)

We are living in the post silicone revolution era now, and, just as the industrial revolution did before it, it is changing EVERYTHING about our world and at increasing speed. As information literally IS power, this is also altering the political and social demographics of our species and the trigger to that whole sequence, the butterfly's wing beat that leads to the storm on the other side of the earth, is US - we gamers and our endless hedonistic quest for the Hollodeck from Star Trek.

One day we will have it guys, make no mistake and by then, the whole of our (Western at least) global culture will have been irreversibly changed by the effort to make it happen.

:sunny:

[Torplexed]

- we gamers and our endless hedonistic quest for the Hollodeck from Star Trek.
Geez Louise. Enjoy yerself in there. :roll:

[Lionman]

- we gamers and our endless hedonistic quest for the Hollodeck from Star Trek.
Geez Louise. Enjoy yerself in there. :roll:

Yeah bro - I enjoyeth mightily! & Happy New Year!

[Iron Budokan]

Yes, I would like to walk through the submarine, please, with sugar on it.

[Front Runner]

While giving those who choose, the opportunity to take an inspection tour through the boat, it could also provide a jumping off point for future mods.
The OP mentioned more controls. I like to have ultimate control over all facets of a simulation, including control over each engine, whether or not it is assigned to propulsion or charge, control over the dive planes etc. etc.
Also from a historical point of view, just make sure that each sub model has all of it's own correctly rendered compartments.

[Extra Ketchup]

I am really enjoying the free cam mod, the one that let's you "walk around" the command room (actually, it's more like floating, like a ghost). One of the things that amazes me is the amount of 3D detail in the modeling of the rooms. Get close, and you'll see the individual bolts are modeled (not just flat textures). At least one poster on the wall has a real 3D curl. Each pipe is modeled and almost everything looks good up close. Even brackets that hold the metal boxes to the wall are modeled accurately, and you have to "climb" to some odd places to even see them!

This is a lot of detail for the default stay-in-the-center-and-spin mode. It makes me think that the devs did have plans to allow you to walk around at one point. Another thing, ever notice how the crew's eyes follow you as you "walk" around? Creepy! Again, why code that into the game unless at some point the object was to have a walk / "float" mode.

The other thing I've been doing with the free cam mod is exploring other ships using the < and >. While not as detailed as the command room, I am amazed at how much detail is rendered on these ships, considing they would normally be seen far away through the scope. One doesn't appreciate the size of a battleship until he stands on the deck (even virtually). One thing I really enjoy is going up to the bridge of a warship and watch it exchange fire with another ship. Though I know this isn't the original goal of the devs, it's actually quite immersive. I recently used the mission editor to pit the Iowa against the Yamato, and then I just "walked around" on the deck of Iowa as these two massive battleships slugged away at each other for hours. Completely outside the original intent of the game, but fun none-the-less!

[Sailor Steve]

Extra Ketchup?

WELCOME ABOARD!:sunny:

[Reaves]

http://omglol.kerrolisaa.com/1/8979.jpg


QFT!

[Capt. Willard]

I would love to be able to move about the boat from stem to stern. It would help pass the time during long submerged evasions of the escorts if one could walk the boat every now and then to keep up moral etc. Or to just pass the time.

[stlkrash]

Isn't it easy enough to just replace the wav file for backround noise with say an edited part from like Operation Pink Sub (lol). Just rip the parts and patch it together? Just wondering because this is a Flightsimmer trick. And the card game thing is a PREFECT idea, It really could be done MP too.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

I'm all for it, if you can address the issues outlined above. I agree that the leaking and damage shouldnt be hard to do, and the clickable buttons too (hey, we added buttons to the toolbar)

I'm wondering if crew could be added also. I mean, they spawn when Generalm Quarters is called, so..