If Sonalysts made a new game... - Page 10

fatty · 01-13-11, 11:41 AM

For release, limit to one or a few platforms. Keep the initial costs low. Start out with something simple and well-known, like the venerable 688. After release, start pumping out additional platforms as DLCs to continue generating revenue.
Keep the 2D multi-station interface. It is time-tested. Adding 3D stations or interiors needlessly increases workload.
Time for a graphics overhaul. Everything from environmental effects to platform models.
Ditch the traditional campaigns and go with something dynamic/procedural. Say, a conflict between US/China a la Tom Clancy's SSN. Player is deployed at sea, gets radio messages for new tasking. Tasks might include things like escort task groups, gather intel, deploy SEALs, conduct strikes, raid commerce, etc. Like SH series, player returns to base or whatever to rearm etc.
New platforms should be playable in the campaign. Had fun sinking Chinese destroyers in an SSN? Now you can play the other side of the campaign as a Chinese destroyer, for the low price of $15!
Multiplayer improvements have already been talked about and are badly needed.

Rip · 01-13-11, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaye T. Bai

I hope Sonalysts updates the 3D models/textures for the surface combatant ships and submarines. Seriously, Dangerous Waters uses the exact same models from Fleet Command.

It kind of kills the immersion when I raise the periscope or stand on the sail and see a hideous monstrosity of a ship. I mean, the Arleigh Burke-class DDG model in Dangerous Waters looks nothing like the one in reality. Maybe I'm a little biased since I got into the game much later after its release.

What are you doing on the sail? Unless you are navigating in or out of homeport there is no reason to be surfaced. This type of game shouldn't be about what you see of the outside world but how data is communicated to you for solving a complex tactical and strategic problem. On a typical six month patrol I doubt we saw more that two craft visually except for navigating in and out of port. I feel that having them sound and react properly is ten times more important than having them look proper.

Takeda Shingen · 01-13-11, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatty

For release, limit to one or a few platforms. Keep the initial costs low. Start out with something simple and well-known, like the venerable 688. After release, start pumping out additional platforms as DLCs to continue generating revenue.
Keep the 2D multi-station interface. It is time-tested. Adding 3D stations or interiors needlessly increases workload.
Time for a graphics overhaul. Everything from environmental effects to platform models.
Ditch the traditional campaigns and go with something dynamic/procedural. Say, a conflict between US/China a la Tom Clancy's SSN. Player is deployed at sea, gets radio messages for new tasking. Tasks might include things like escort task groups, gather intel, deploy SEALs, conduct strikes, raid commerce, etc. Like SH series, player returns to base or whatever to rearm etc.
New platforms should be playable in the campaign. Had fun sinking Chinese destroyers in an SSN? Now you can play the other side of the campaign as a Chinese destroyer, for the low price of $15!
Multiplayer improvements have already been talked about and are badly needed.

A lot of that has to do with another great point that I failed to mention: add-ons. If starting with just a 688 (done right), they could release add-on platforms and people would pay for them!

fatty · 01-13-11, 12:27 PM

Exactly. Look at Railworks 2, they have around 70 DLCs between $5 and $40, and still they come. If they can do that with trains, I figure this would be a good way to make a navy game profitable for Sonalysts.

Because let's be honest - all the fancy pants suggestions on the first few pages will never be possible unless the developers are making money.

scrapser · 01-13-11, 01:21 PM

I haven't read the entire thread...sorry.

I really liked the concept of Fleet Command. It was sort of a fast food version of Harpoon but the bugs made it frustrating to play. I would like to see another attempt at the concept. Modern naval sims should be strategic since so much of the platforms and weapons are geared towards stand-off engagement.

I have no idea what Sonalyst's forte is but it would be interesting to see what they could come up with by way of a WW2 boat sim.

Rip · 01-13-11, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrapser

I haven't read the entire thread...sorry.

I really liked the concept of Fleet Command. It was sort of a fast food version of Harpoon but the bugs made it frustrating to play. I would like to see another attempt at the concept. Modern naval sims should be strategic since so much of the platforms and weapons are geared towards stand-off engagement.

I have no idea what Sonalyst's forte is but it would be interesting to see what they could come up with by way of a WW2 boat sim.

It isn't making WW2 sims. They make highly technical simulations for the military designed to simulate complex sensor and environments and train watchstanders on operating those sensors and commanders on using that sensor information to obtain tactical advantage. WW2 electronics and sensors are so simple compared to todays that I think it would be a waste of some very talented people to end up making a simple visual observation and shoot dumb weapons in a straight line simulation.

Such a thing would be better developed by the normal group of eye candy game developers. You don't need a room full of engineers with PHDs in acoustics and electronic warfare to make a ww2 sim. A ww2 sim is to a modern sub sim what a calvalry sim would be to to DCS (Digital Combat Sim).

In the end there are dozens of developers with the necessary talent to make a ww2 sim, while SCS is one of the very few with the staff that can simulate modern naval warfare accurately.

Delareon · 01-13-11, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fusoya77

...
If Sonalysts was to make a new modern sim, what game should it be like:
...

i think the whole WW2 sim discussion is pointless if u just read the first post carefully.

Takeda Shingen · 01-13-11, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delareon

i think the whole WW2 sim discussion is pointless if u just read the first post carefully.

Exactly. Anyone looking for a WWII sim is going to be sorely disappointed.

Molon Labe · 01-13-11, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I completely disagree. The last thing that I would want is for SCS to take the Silent Hunter route. I am completely fine with 2-D pannels, and if I want to manage the mood of the AI, I'll play Sims 3.

I'm with Takeda-sama here. I suppose 3D stations would be nice to have, but it's a very small improvement and they only have so much money to spend.

zamfe · 01-13-11, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

The last thing that I would want is for SCS to take the Silent Hunter route. I am completely fine with 2-D pannels, and if I want to manage the mood of the AI, I'll play Sims 3.

That's a nightmare!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by MBot

Saw this topic mentioned over at SimHQ and thought it is a good enough reason to reactivate this old login

I would choose a single vehicle multiple stations subsim set in the cold war (WWIII respectively) with a catchy name such as Cold War Warrior.

The feature I would choose is a persistent world/dynamic campaign (if you can still call that a single feature).

Mbot from ED forums?

the_tyrant · 01-13-11, 05:24 PM

after some thinking, Most of us are down for anything
just think about it, there are exactly 0 naval sim in development
even the silent hunter and battlestations series have stopped development

I guess we would be willing to buy anything
especially after maybe 1-2 years after silent hunter 5 and battlestations pacific have become outdated

difool2 · 01-13-11, 07:07 PM

Three words: full dynamic campaign. Let me wander the North Atlantic for a month after a Red Storm Rising type scenario starts to unfold. Let me patrol the Eastern Seaboard in peacetime looking for Russian subs (each successful ID gives you a brownie point or such). A Chinese campaign where I get to lob Tomahawks against Chinese installations while trying to dodge their electroboats.

Castout · 01-13-11, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Absolutely. I'm crossing my fingers that SCS doesn't decide to re-invent the wheel here; they've got a formula that works and all we need is an update.

Indeed I didn't realize how well their formula is until they implemented it for helo, FFG and planes

. I thought it was going to be awkward especially for the plane and helo but things turned out to be fine strangely

.
Now I realize their brilliancy in abstracting systems.

Scion · 01-14-11, 01:15 AM

My 2c:

A Fleet Command sequel or the like would be my preference. If feasible with multiplayer compatibility with Dangerous Waters, or the ability to also control platforms in the new game too (existing platforms is fine - this will already be enough work I'm sure).

I would foresee this working by allowing players to command a side as "Fleet Commander" (as set in the scenario - Side 0 through to Side 9 would allow for 10 players - alliances etc to be set by scenario designer). In addition to this, players could control the playable platforms, and would be able to receive instructions from the Human and/or AI fleet commander.

For example - the Fleet Commander would like a player to identify an unknown surface contact. He sends the command via the interface (eg Identify Track 4123), which the player receives as a radio message (Identify Track L123) which would also come as an unknown over the link data. Submarines should only be able to receive orders, link updates or send/receive team chat messages when at comms depth with the radio antenna/floating wire raised, but the fleet commander would also be able to utilise the come to comms depth command.

Support or at least compatibility with Linux (or Wine) would also be a great feature IMHO. Minor graphics improvements would be welcome, but this should be on a basis of what is easy to implement, not what looks perfect. 2D stations for player platforms are fine (although even greater realism à la Fast Attack would be great!). We are dealing with a niche simulator, eye candy is just that - candy. I'm not expecting a 3 course meal.

Comments Regarding Dynamic Campaign:

A dynamic campaign also sounds like a great single player feature. If this is implemented, please also introduce the ability to go to greater levels of time compression (2048x min), with the ability to automatically jump to 0x or 1x TC when a new contact is detected, either by any platform in a FC style simulator, or by the autocrew in a DW style simulator. I can imagine the games' background processing of sonar and other game data would be very difficult at high compression levels, so this would need to be simplified and processed by autocrew in the case of player controlled platforms.

This is just a wish list - I'm already a certain purchaser of any new SCS product, and can't wait to hear further information

Basss · 01-14-11, 11:47 AM

Nice SDK, like Microsoft Flight Simulator 9 or X. Developers could create new platforms, mods etc.

01-13-11, 11:41 AM	#136
fatty The Old Man Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,448 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	For release, limit to one or a few platforms. Keep the initial costs low. Start out with something simple and well-known, like the venerable 688. After release, start pumping out additional platforms as DLCs to continue generating revenue. Keep the 2D multi-station interface. It is time-tested. Adding 3D stations or interiors needlessly increases workload. Time for a graphics overhaul. Everything from environmental effects to platform models. Ditch the traditional campaigns and go with something dynamic/procedural. Say, a conflict between US/China a la Tom Clancy's SSN. Player is deployed at sea, gets radio messages for new tasking. Tasks might include things like escort task groups, gather intel, deploy SEALs, conduct strikes, raid commerce, etc. Like SH series, player returns to base or whatever to rearm etc. New platforms should be playable in the campaign. Had fun sinking Chinese destroyers in an SSN? Now you can play the other side of the campaign as a Chinese destroyer, for the low price of $15! Multiplayer improvements have already been talked about and are badly needed.

01-13-11, 12:27 PM	#139
fatty The Old Man Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,448 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Exactly. Look at Railworks 2, they have around 70 DLCs between $5 and $40, and still they come. If they can do that with trains, I figure this would be a good way to make a navy game profitable for Sonalysts. Because let's be honest - all the fancy pants suggestions on the first few pages will never be possible unless the developers are making money. Last edited by fatty; 01-13-11 at 01:00 PM.

01-13-11, 01:21 PM	#140
scrapser Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 530 Downloads: 12 Uploads: 0	I haven't read the entire thread...sorry. I really liked the concept of Fleet Command. It was sort of a fast food version of Harpoon but the bugs made it frustrating to play. I would like to see another attempt at the concept. Modern naval sims should be strategic since so much of the platforms and weapons are geared towards stand-off engagement. I have no idea what Sonalyst's forte is but it would be interesting to see what they could come up with by way of a WW2 boat sim. __________________ Gaming Computer Specs: CM Stacker 930 DFI LP UT X58-T3eH8 i7 920 CPU TR 120 Extreme HS (lapped) 6 GB OCZ Platinum 1600 (8x175 = 1400) BFG GTX 295 Silverstone DA1000W PSU Sony GDM-FW900 24" Wide Screen CRT WinXP Pro 32-bit

01-13-11, 05:24 PM	#146
the_tyrant Admiral Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 2,272 Downloads: 58 Uploads: 0	after some thinking, Most of us are down for anything just think about it, there are exactly 0 naval sim in development even the silent hunter and battlestations series have stopped development I guess we would be willing to buy anything especially after maybe 1-2 years after silent hunter 5 and battlestations pacific have become outdated __________________ My own open source project on Sourceforge OTP.net KGB grade encryption for the rest of us

01-13-11, 07:07 PM	#147
difool2 Commander Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 459 Downloads: 30 Uploads: 0	Three words: full dynamic campaign. Let me wander the North Atlantic for a month after a Red Storm Rising type scenario starts to unfold. Let me patrol the Eastern Seaboard in peacetime looking for Russian subs (each successful ID gives you a brownie point or such). A Chinese campaign where I get to lob Tomahawks against Chinese installations while trying to dodge their electroboats.

01-14-11, 01:15 AM	#149
Scion Sailor man Join Date: May 2001 Location: New Zealand Posts: 47 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	My 2c: A Fleet Command sequel or the like would be my preference. If feasible with multiplayer compatibility with Dangerous Waters, or the ability to also control platforms in the new game too (existing platforms is fine - this will already be enough work I'm sure). I would foresee this working by allowing players to command a side as "Fleet Commander" (as set in the scenario - Side 0 through to Side 9 would allow for 10 players - alliances etc to be set by scenario designer). In addition to this, players could control the playable platforms, and would be able to receive instructions from the Human and/or AI fleet commander. For example - the Fleet Commander would like a player to identify an unknown surface contact. He sends the command via the interface (eg Identify Track 4123), which the player receives as a radio message (Identify Track L123) which would also come as an unknown over the link data. Submarines should only be able to receive orders, link updates or send/receive team chat messages when at comms depth with the radio antenna/floating wire raised, but the fleet commander would also be able to utilise the come to comms depth command. Support or at least compatibility with Linux (or Wine) would also be a great feature IMHO. Minor graphics improvements would be welcome, but this should be on a basis of what is easy to implement, not what looks perfect. 2D stations for player platforms are fine (although even greater realism à la Fast Attack would be great!). We are dealing with a niche simulator, eye candy is just that - candy. I'm not expecting a 3 course meal. Comments Regarding Dynamic Campaign: A dynamic campaign also sounds like a great single player feature. If this is implemented, please also introduce the ability to go to greater levels of time compression (2048x min), with the ability to automatically jump to 0x or 1x TC when a new contact is detected, either by any platform in a FC style simulator, or by the autocrew in a DW style simulator. I can imagine the games' background processing of sonar and other game data would be very difficult at high compression levels, so this would need to be simplified and processed by autocrew in the case of player controlled platforms. This is just a wish list - I'm already a certain purchaser of any new SCS product, and can't wait to hear further information

01-14-11, 11:47 AM	#150
Basss Swabbie Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 7 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Nice SDK, like Microsoft Flight Simulator 9 or X. Developers could create new platforms, mods etc.