If Sonalysts made a new game...

[Julhelm]

I'd like it if a new game was much more like Fast Attack. Far more playable IMO than 688I or SC and most importantly it has enough atmosphere that you really feel as if you are commanding a crew.

One thing Fast Attack does very well is provide you with sonar crew that call out any new contacts so that you may investigate the situation yourself and assign trackers and tell them to classify contacts. In SC it's either auto crew that locks you out or find every contact yourself. Same with the active intercept and esm.

Also in both Fast Attack and Red Storm Rising an engagement always starts with at least one sonar contact so that you have something to go on. Not so in SC where it's entirely possible to completely miss your objective by heading in the wrong direction from the start and never hearing a single contact!

I suppose 688(i), SC, and DW are great if you are willing to spend years learning every little technical detail in order to be successful. However if I am to buy a new Sonalysts game it would have to have more accessible gameplay and importantly fun. As it is the current games are too unforgiving to be much fun for the casual player like me.

A dynamic campaign with story-enhancing cutscenes like in Red Storm Rising would be icing on the cake.

[Kaye T. Bai]

Perhaps it's possible to please both hard-core simulation players and the casual gamer. In Dangerous Waters, this was already possible to some degree. Tweak with the settings a bit and you can have a hardcore simulator, and an arcade game, such as the "show truth" option where all you have to do acquire the target and fire your ASMs or ADCAPs.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Kaye T. Bai

Perhaps it's possible to please both hard-core simulation players and the casual gamer. In Dangerous Waters, this was already possible to some degree. Tweak with the settings a bit and you can have a hardcore simulator, and an arcade game, such as the "show truth" option where all you have to do acquire the target and fire your ASMs or ADCAPs.

I am okay with scalable realism as we had in DW, but I think SH5 is a excellent example of what can go wrong when you try to please everybody. My experience with that game, for which I had such high hopes, is why I am so insistent about a new SCS game being a hardcore simulator first. It is what they do best, and I see no reason to mess with it. Sonalysts make most of their money from military contracts, so I don't think they're expecting to move a ton of units if they were to market a new product. I think that they are perfectly comfortable with the product being for a niche market.

[Soundman]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I'd pay $200 for a high-quality modern sim, and I am betting that there are a lot of others here that would scrape it together as well. This community is very hungry for something new.

I've read this whole thread and probably can't add anything to the discussion that someone else has not already stated other than this...

I completely agree with the above statement and would like to expound a little bit. Simulations are what got me into computing to begin with. Janes F-15 was the first piece of software I ever purchased and Janes 688I was second. While I may be guilty of also playing some "games", I'm a "simmer" at heart.

Here's my point....Out of all the sims I've owned (and there are many) I've spent literally and without exagerating, 3500-4000 hours (heck, probably many more) playing Falcon 4.0 through all of it's various (and many) incarnations. I've quite often thought to myself.. "If only they knew what I'd have been willing to pay".

I believe developers are selling themselves short on how much value a good sim has to those of us considering ourselves true simmers. They are continually failing by trying to target "gamers" and "Simmers" simutaneously. THAT, is their downfall.. Do one or the other. A truely good sim will be timeless for all practical purposes and stand the test of time as Falcon has if done right. Granted, I don't hop in the Viper seat quite as often as I used to, but to this day, can't imagine not having the capability to play it. It is IMO, the best all round sim to date when it comes to replayability. If I had to today, would easily plop down another $40.00 to continue using it if I had to. A very small amount considering the many hours of joy I've gotten from it. I'm sure many will agree and this needs to be communicated to deveolpers. Otherwise, "Simulation" as we know it WILL die.

Will gamers pay $200.00 or more for a good sim? Probably not, but on the other hand, how many gamers are going to purchase anything that takes thoroughly reading a manual before useage to intelligently learn operation of the platform? ..Not many IMO. So I think they are spinning their wheels by believing gamers will buy these games/sims to begin with, even if charging only 50-60 bucks.

Bottom line.....Create a good package, do it right the first time (out of the box), allow demo play to convince non-believers, promote it well (no problem with this website) and it WILL sell when word of mouth gets around that it's a MUST HAVE. Charge what you must, if it's done well, we WILL buy it!

I would like to see Neal (or a moderator) put up a poll about this. If the developers realize that the "sim" community can make up for the lack of sales from the "gaming" community by making a pure, well done simulation, but charging more for the product, maybe they will see things differently.

BTW... Dangerous Waters or Fleet Command. I would be happy to see either. When Fleet Command came out, I loved it, but it was very buggy and don't recall ever finishing a complete online game with anyone, but it was a blast to play online until the game crashed. ....

Actually, this is one aspect not covered here either... I don't see that many possibilities in a modern sub simulation in respect to online play. Submarine duals are just not that realistic and tend to be arcadish (not to mention boring). However, a new "Fleet Command" has many possibilities with player vs player online and would be sublime. .. Don't get me wrong, I'll take a good subsim any day, it does not require online play.. Shoot, make both of them, guaranteed I'll buy'em both!

[Reaper51]

I agree 90% with the above post. Google E-Sim Games, or Steel Beasts Pro PE and you'll find that exact business model. You pay $125.00 for their sim, which is constantly being updated, and is considered the tank sim. They also charge $20.00 per update, which was pretty well received.

However, do take note of the stability and support of their product. Trying to charge $125.00 for a buggy, half-assed sim like DW isn't going to get you very far. Also, for the love of God, learn how to design a good mission editor. I consider the junk editor from OFP better than DW's editor.

Lastly, I disagree that a game can't be both a sim and a game while still being very successful. I refer you to SH III. If it's done very, very carefully, it'll work.

[Old Dog]

I would prefer to see something on the order of DW or 688I, but with the addition of the new SSN Virginia Class boats with their capability to engage in Littoral operations, from delivery of SEAL teams to more traditional deep water operations.
http://www.navysite.de/ssn/ssn774.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Virginia_%28SSN-774%29

[Kaye T. Bai]

Originally Posted by Reaper51

I agree 90% with the above post. Google E-Sim Games, or Steel Beasts Pro PE and you'll find that exact business model. You pay $125.00 for their sim, which is constantly being updated, and is considered the tank sim. They also charge $20.00 per update, which was pretty well received. However, do take note of the stability and support of their product. Trying to charge $125.00 for a buggy, half-assed sim like DW isn't going to get you very far. Also, for the love of God, learn how to design a good mission editor. I consider the junk editor from OFP better than DW's editor. Lastly, I disagree that a game can't be both a sim and a game while still being very successful. I refer you to SH III. If it's done very, very carefully, it'll work.

Don't be hating on Operation Flashpoint man. But yeah, if SCS is going to charge a couple hundred dollars for Dangerous Waters or a similar sequel, it better be the best damn simulator in history. With Steel Beasts, what you pay is what you get.

Cheers.

[tonibamestre]

Hey Guys,I think Ive got a brilliant idea.Why we ALL THE MODERN NAVAL SIMMERS do not create an account with lets say 100 or 200 $ directed to SCS or whatever any other developers.A new aeronaval simulator creation process could start,DW style with new graphics and techniques,and implementing new ideas,platforms and resources from the worldwide community.

Does that make sense you think?

[Hawk66]

Originally Posted by Kaye T. Bai

Don't be hating on Operation Flashpoint man. But yeah, if SCS is going to charge a couple hundred dollars for Dangerous Waters or a similar sequel, it better be the best damn simulator in history. With Steel Beasts, what you pay is what you get.

Cheers.

As Frying Tiger mentioned here http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...3&postcount=12, the problem with a high price product is that the user expects a very good customer support and continued development. The question is if SCS will commit to do so.

I think that would only work if SCS develops a new NavalSimulationEngine from scratch, which can be used as a basis for paying commerical(us) and government organizations. As long as the government customers do not request a major update of the DW plattform, thus financing a big deal of the new engine, I doubt that this will work.

@3D
I also do not need 3D graphics at all...they consume a lot of development time and personally I'd like to see the investment going into the engine/AI/scripting possibilities. But on the other hand then you have the problem that almost no casual gamer will buy this sim.

@Content, developed by Community
If SCS would not invest in the content (creating sophistcated (dynamic-)campaigns/missions) and let that be developed by the community after shipment of the product, you have the problem that
- the product gets bad reviews since of missing/only rudimentary content and again casual games will not buy this sim
- if you do not create complex content, you do not have test cases to validate the engine/concept...you face the risk that you ship a buggy product/engine and custom content developer abandon the product since they jump from one showstopper to the other one. You need a 'reference' content template.

What might work is that SCS hires temporarily community member to build content during the production of the sim, because they would be cheaper than full-time staff and there would be a very early (external) feedback cycle.

[Drakken72]

This is my personal focus point :

• a mix between DW and FC as it was the simulator TOTAL AIR WAR of the DID, where you could be tactically follow the scenario and could impart orders to all the units on the field, with the possibility to directly pilot a particular unit.

• a recent database and complete with all the greatest military strengths to today present.
• More stability in multiplayer game with the possibility to save the games in multiplayer mode

***very important ***

• Possibility to have an "open" editor to create new unit (with new sensor,weapon ect,ect) optional to make it "control platform" with add already present "bases" stations and allowing to personalize it (labels of the names of the sensors , colours, type of sensors ) etc etc

A resurgent Russia could be a possibility; but I do like the Chinese angle!
How 'bout a more aggressive Japan or Germany like something out of Harold Coyle's "The Ten Thousand"

[PL_Andrev]

1. Play any unit what you want: submarine, destroyer, battleship... as you wish,

2. Play any side what you want: german, american, japan, british, italian... as you wish,

3. Play multiplayer matches with or against your friends or AI (6 vs. 6) at convoy battles or sea battles at each side as you want,

4. Control other units to avoid enemy submarines like convoy commander, single merchants, carriers,

5. Control several units at this same time - if you want - if not, AI will control them.

6. Use on-deck planes an your Bismarck, Rodney or I-400 to patrol nearest sea, control planes by self for patrol or attack be self with guns, bombs, torpedoes like in Battlestation series,

7. Play single mission by any unit for test, single patrol or career,

8. Develop your career with each nation at submarine or naval fleet,

9. Build you own missions with mission editor like SH3 / SH4 / SH5 which can be uploaded by host to other players, or create your random mission to immediately playing like in SH4,

10. Add easy you own ships or warships / submarines to game like dutch De Ryuter class or russian Szcz class submarine,

Something more?


11. Control you submarine and warship at shallow waters - there are much of shoals which can trap / damage your unit!

12. Use radio to take messages about ships / mine fields / sea supports / protections by fleets,

13. Measure range from enemy by hand and send message by radio to other team to show position of enemy - by part of wolfpack!

14. Select different modes at game "select, shoot, forget" or "full real aiming" by torpedoes or guns,

15. Select different modes at game: "battles only" or "manual searching and attack",

[Takeda Shingen]

The SCS mission editor is completely superior to the one from the SH series. Also, again, this isn't likely to be a WWII title. If you are looking for that, you're going to be disappointed.

[zakarpatska]

I think one of the most important things is that Sonalysts needs to do what they think will work. It is their game and they need to drive the concept from what worked in previous games as well as what didn't work. Letting the potential users of the game have too much input will lead to a "Snakes on a Sub" experience.

For what it is worth I own a copy of SB Pro PE, so I am willing pay for a quality simulation.

Those are my feelings today in any case - they may be different tomorrow...

[Basss]

Guys, its only suggestion like "wanna" or does we have any chances to see new sim from Sonalyst (development is strated)?