If Sonalysts made a new game... - Page 9

goldorak · 01-12-11, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Prediction.......If this is a new game announcement....it's Fleet Command 2.

I hope not, I wish they would improve on an already good game DW.
Take the good ideas from Dr.Sid, for instance the ability to scan very precisley around a specific value in broadband sonar with the mouse wheel. Its seems such an obvious and productive feature, but they didn't implement it for DW.

Use a worldwide vector map with depth information.
Use realistic night vision and curvature of the earth.
Reimplement correctly all data that pertains to tma, and make sure the autotma works realistically (not like now where it basically ignores speed information).
Give us a more precise bearing reading, up to 1/100 of a degree. Make available bearing rate, and range rate. Give correct value of bearing rate and not like now that it is based on the tma solution (this is wrong).
Redesign the fire control station so as to show much more information pertaining to intercept course, depth of torpedo, actually show complete feedback of wire guided torpedos.
Introduce a lot of diesel electric subs, and AIP subs. These are the platforms of the future.
Take example from some of the great advances the RA mod team has done.

Oh yeah, last but not least, considering its a sub game use a good sound library for enviromental and submarines sounds !!!! Not crappy 128 kps mp3. Lets try some good flac files for once. Having a good audio feedback is going to increase immersiveness a lot.

Kaye T. Bai · 01-12-11, 08:15 PM

I'm hoping for a sequel to Dangerous Waters, but as I said before, I'll be happy with anything at this point. Fleet Command 2 isn't such a bad concept, as it'll be great fun commanding a modern naval task force of CVNs, DDGs, CGs, FFGs, etc.

JamesT73J · 01-13-11, 04:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Prediction.......If this is a new game announcement....it's Fleet Command 2.

I hope not. I was hoping for a narrower, more detailed focus. Takeda mentioned something along the lines of SB Pro PE - the consumer standard for simulation, in my opinion, with strict focus on what can be modelled well.

MBot · 01-13-11, 07:08 AM

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).

oscar19681 · 01-13-11, 07:16 AM

Whatever they decide to make , please NO 2-D STATIONS. I mean comeon its not the 90,s anymore and allthough i thought DW was a interesting sim i really hated the cheezy 2-d panels , they were boring and extremly unimmersive. Give us some 3-d stations . I,m not asking for a totally modeled sub like sh-5 or anything but at least give us something like what we had in sh-3.

Kaye T. Bai · 01-13-11, 08:04 AM

Maybe I'm just dreaming here, but a walkable sub and interactive crew members would be nice. Just saying.

Takeda Shingen · 01-13-11, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaye T. Bai

Maybe I'm just dreaming here, but a walkable sub and interactive crew members would be nice. Just saying.

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.

goldorak · 01-13-11, 08:47 AM

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.

+1

Even 15 years later, Fast Attack (and SH I) have 2d panels of such beauty and detail that they blow low detail 3d panels (as seen in SH3, 4 and 5) out of the water. Really just because its 2d doesn't make it irrelevant. By doing away 3d panels, SCS can invest their meager budget for more important things.
A well done 2d panel will always, always be better than a poorly modeled 3d station.

Takeda Shingen · 01-13-11, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldorak

+1

Even 15 years later, Fast Attack (and SH I) have 2d panels of such beauty and detail that they blow low detail 3d panels (as seen in SH3, 4 and 5) out of the water. Really just because its 2d doesn't make it irrelevant. By doing away 3d panels, SCS can invest their meager budget for more important things.
A well done 2d panel will always, always be better than a poorly modeled 3d station.

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.

JamesT73J · 01-13-11, 09:07 AM

Indeed, many of the problems faced by the SH devs are directly related to the sheer time spent on the eye candy.

You cannot have it both ways. SCS could update what they already have and I'd be happy. Keep improving the physics and the station fidelity and it's all good.

tonibamestre · 01-13-11, 09:47 AM

Yeah,implement global Navigation capability,20 or 30 decent ports + more surface units,DDs,FFGs,CGs and............full operational CVs,starting on Forrestal class and beyond.

Kaye T. Bai · 01-13-11, 10:02 AM

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.

Rompedor · 01-13-11, 10:12 AM

I would like to be a simulation game where you could change with mods.

Using languages like python or lua.

And the community to freely add new platforms and even these could be crewed by adding new stations to play.

I prefer 2d stations because it is easier modeable when we add new platform crewable.

Seeadler · 01-13-11, 11:11 AM

2D panels are fine, more details and functionality can be put on 2D panels and it's easier to programm. Most FS9/FSX players switching on approach from the 3D virtual cockpit to the 2D panel or using the 2D panel at all.

DW with updated graphics/shaders for the ocean and environment, more detailed ship models and a common 3D format or importer/exporter to easier add additional models, that's my wish!

fitzcarraldo · 01-13-11, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seeadler

2D panels are fine, more details and functionality can be put on 2D panels and it's easier to programm. Most FS9/FSX players switching on approach from the 3D virtual cockpit to the 2D panel or using the 2D panel at all.

DW with updated graphics/shaders for the ocean and environment, more detailed ship models and a common 3D format or importer/exporter to easier add additional models, that's my wish!

Same opinion.

Regards.

Fitzcarraldo

01-13-11, 07:16 AM	#125
oscar19681 Admiral Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: netherlands Posts: 2,020 Downloads: 119 Uploads: 0	Whatever they decide to make , please NO 2-D STATIONS. I mean comeon its not the 90,s anymore and allthough i thought DW was a interesting sim i really hated the cheezy 2-d panels , they were boring and extremly unimmersive. Give us some 3-d stations . I,m not asking for a totally modeled sub like sh-5 or anything but at least give us something like what we had in sh-3. __________________ we live we die but death does not ends it. Jim Morrison 1943-1971

01-13-11, 09:07 AM	#130
JamesT73J Medic Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 167 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	Indeed, many of the problems faced by the SH devs are directly related to the sheer time spent on the eye candy. You cannot have it both ways. SCS could update what they already have and I'd be happy. Keep improving the physics and the station fidelity and it's all good. __________________ "My advice - buy the damn game and play the arse off it. It's not all there yet but it's still a damn good game, and we all know it'll be even better once the community is done crawling all over it." User 'Sideways' 08th March 2010.

01-13-11, 10:12 AM	#133
Rompedor Swabbie Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Spain Posts: 12 Downloads: 49 Uploads: 0	I would like to be a simulation game where you could change with mods. Using languages like python or lua. And the community to freely add new platforms and even these could be crewed by adding new stations to play. I prefer 2d stations because it is easier modeable when we add new platform crewable. Last edited by Rompedor; 01-13-11 at 10:22 AM.

01-12-11, 08:15 PM	#122
Kaye T. Bai Samurai Navy Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Western Hemisphere, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster Posts: 584 Downloads: 22 Uploads: 0	I'm hoping for a sequel to Dangerous Waters, but as I said before, I'll be happy with anything at this point. Fleet Command 2 isn't such a bad concept, as it'll be great fun commanding a modern naval task force of CVNs, DDGs, CGs, FFGs, etc.

01-13-11, 07:08 AM	#124
MBot Loader Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Switzerland Posts: 90 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	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).

01-13-11, 08:04 AM	#126
Kaye T. Bai Samurai Navy Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Western Hemisphere, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster Posts: 584 Downloads: 22 Uploads: 0	Maybe I'm just dreaming here, but a walkable sub and interactive crew members would be nice. Just saying.

01-13-11, 09:47 AM	#131
tonibamestre 中国水兵 Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 271 Downloads: 82 Uploads: 0	Yeah,implement global Navigation capability,20 or 30 decent ports + more surface units,DDs,FFGs,CGs and............full operational CVs,starting on Forrestal class and beyond.

01-13-11, 10:02 AM	#132
Kaye T. Bai Samurai Navy Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Western Hemisphere, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster Posts: 584 Downloads: 22 Uploads: 0	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.

01-13-11, 11:11 AM	#134
Seeadler Pacific Aces Dev Team Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Northern Germany Posts: 1,096 Downloads: 169 Uploads: 0	2D panels are fine, more details and functionality can be put on 2D panels and it's easier to programm. Most FS9/FSX players switching on approach from the 3D virtual cockpit to the 2D panel or using the 2D panel at all. DW with updated graphics/shaders for the ocean and environment, more detailed ship models and a common 3D format or importer/exporter to easier add additional models, that's my wish!