A CALL TO UBISOFT GUYS !

[turnerg]

Allow me to clear my throat:

DESTROYER COMMAND 2 OR CRUISER/BATTLESHIP/FLEET COMMAND


We've had enough U-Boats for now. What we need is a blend of Total War on the strategic map, and Destroyer Command on the battle map. Full "what if" or historical campaigns, Full fleet control, ship control, etc. Include all the Plan Z ships, the Montanas, maybe even edge into the Cold War. Use a simplified mechanic to manage the land/air war but still allow the player to manage the strategy. Will it ever happen?

NO. Ubisoft has zero interest, and there are no small studios who have the resources to make it happen. The ship modeling alone will require a full team of pros to build.

It doesn't help the "Indie" case when a studio like Storm Eagle (Distant Guns/Jutland) walks off with well over $100 of my hard earned money with no updates since 2013.

[ikalugin]

Can I get my Soviet pr23 ships? Pretty please?

[captziggy]

If only we could interest another developer into making a quality game.Maybe a call to all members for a write in to Microsoft.Could'nt hurt.

Originally Posted by captziggy

If only we could interest another developer into making a quality game.Maybe a call to all members for a write in to Microsoft.Could'nt hurt.

I do consider wasting my time as "hurtful" to be honest.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by captziggy

If only we could interest another developer into making a quality game.Maybe a call to all members for a write in to Microsoft.Could'nt hurt.

They recently pulled the plug and sold the rights to the Microsoft flight simulator series after the abysmal failure that was the "Pay as you go" modeled Microsoft Flight.

Microsoft Flight, with its new "world" only simulating a small area of the globe, and "pay as you play" business model that so many developers are so fond of these days they only managed to alienate literally about 99% of the fan base and ultimately killed the series that had been Microsoft's bread and butter simulator for about a quarter of a century... what makes you think they would be interested in jumping into the submarine market? and if they were interested, why would we want their hands on it?

EDIT:

the thing that bothers me about what few upcoming naval combat sims that do exist is that they are geared toward portable gaming (ipad, iphone, android) and this cell phone game feel carries over when they move the game to a PC format. what you end up with feels less like a simulation... or less like an in depth game... and more like something you would waste time playing while waiting for your flight to board at the airport.

Take pacific fleet for example. turn based strategy game at its finest. but it isnt even in the same ball park as the silent hunter series. Move. Aim. Shoot. your turn. compared to the silent hunter series where solutions must be plotted, crews managed, hunting grounds carefully selected... Pacific Fleet, while a fun game within its genre, by comparison is just tic tac toe with ships.

[Onkel Neal]

My 2 cents: Ubisoft put their backs into SH3 and SH4, and were on the way with SH5 before their resources were exhausted before completion. Say what you will about them, they gave us the best WWII submarine simulations, really the only WWII subsims, since 1997.

Making a high fidelity simulation that will please just a fraction of the high demands and expectations of the customers is resource intensive, and that means expensive. When the sales don't add up to a profit, well, there's no business in losing money.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

My 2 cents: Ubisoft put their backs into SH3 and SH4, and were on the way with SH5 before their resources were exhausted before completion. Say what you will about them, they gave us the best WWII submarine simulations, really the only WWII subsims, since 1997.

Making a high fidelity simulation that will please just a fraction of the high demands and expectations of the customers is resource intensive, and that means expensive. When the sales don't add up to a profit, well, there's no business in losing money.

I would agree with you on SH3... i felt like they developed SH4 anticipating that SH3 folks would buy it just because.

but your quote about business is on the money (no pun intended)

The next big submarine Sim that will meet the demands of users wish lists... likely will be crowd funded

[TorpX]

I think most of us understand these game are not going to be perfect, and we can't have everything on our wish lists.

However, an acceptable sub sim should have, at a minimum, all the features that SH1 had, and be an improvement over that which preceded it. SH4 failed in these respects. For example, it lacks SD radar (SH1 had it), and was little improved over SH3 (weather problems and AI just as bad).

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

i felt like they developed SH4 anticipating that SH3 folks would buy it just because.

I think SH4 was being planned before SH3 was released, hence the complaints people made about the voices in English not having German accents. They knew what they wanted to do next right from the start.

[Phrixus]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

My 2 cents: Ubisoft put their backs into SH3 and SH4, and were on the way with SH5 before their resources were exhausted before completion. Say what you will about them, they gave us the best WWII submarine simulations, really the only WWII subsims, since 1997.

Making a high fidelity simulation that will please just a fraction of the high demands and expectations of the customers is resource intensive, and that means expensive. When the sales don't add up to a profit, well, there's no business in losing money.

It's the "best" WW2 subsim because it's basically the only one around. There are nothing out there that you can compare with SH other than another SH.

And it is speaking volume when next to nobody compares the newer SHs favorably to the older ones.

[makman94]

do a search in this site and have a look at W.O.T.A.

[Erdem]

Ubisoft is having way more success focusing on its AAA franchises like Assasins Creed and Far Cry. Why would they bother making sequels to a franchise of a dead genre? How many hardcore subsimmers are out there to justify millions of dollars of development costs? They're out of the simulation market for good.

They'll put the IP to sleep for sure. The only salvation is if an indie developer decides to develop its own submarine simulator.

[TorpX]

Originally Posted by Erdem

Why would they bother making sequels to a franchise of a dead genre?

Indeed, they are the ones who killed it.

People here have often said a good sub sim doesn't bring in enough players. But how do they know? There hasn't been a good one since SHCE.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

My 2 cents: Ubisoft put their backs into SH3 and SH4, and were on the way with SH5 before their resources were exhausted before completion. Say what you will about them, they gave us the best WWII submarine simulations, really the only WWII subsims, since 1997.

Making a high fidelity simulation that will please just a fraction of the high demands and expectations of the customers is resource intensive, and that means expensive. When the sales don't add up to a profit, well, there's no business in losing money.

exactly, game development is a business. At the end of the day, the company has to make a profit.

And as to expecting anything from Ubisoft, I still remember 2010 when a large and vocal part of the community did everything they could to scuttle SH5 and hoped Ubisoft would drop the franchise so that other developpers would rush in.

well you got your wish...but 5 years on, I still don't see anyone rushing in to fill the void....

[Devin Seay]

I said it before and I'll say it again. I'm pretty sure the Silent Hunter 5 was the last Silent Hunter game they'll ever be. I mean, Silent Hunter 5 was just embarrassment all around. Grant it, it had pretty good graphics and I loved the crew and walk around implementation. However, SH5 just didn't deliver at all.



Silent Hunter 5 was rushed and unfinished and that's why it failed.