What about hiroshima?

[Loud_Silence]

Has anyone get close enough to see Little Boy fall in Hiroshima on August 6th 1945? I saw the battle off Samar with the stock game v1.5 and it was quite accurate with its real life counterpart, so i was thinking about other great events.
An atomic explosion from the bridge would be a hell of a great sight, and i would drop even the biggest unprotected convoy to see it:cool:

[rcjonessnp175]

That would be awesome as it was big payback for all the war attrocities and pearl harbor, anyway historicly its the only such attack with such weapon. That stuff still seams so science fiction to me what that bomb actually does


Jonesy

[Torplexed]

Has anyone get close enough to see Little Boy fall in Hiroshima on August 6th 1945? I saw the battle off Samar with the stock game v1.5 and it was quite accurate with its real life counterpart, so i was thinking about other great events.
An atomic explosion from the bridge would be a hell of a great sight, and i would drop even the biggest unprotected convoy to see it:cool:

The actual event is not simulated in the game. You get a radio message that it's taken place and that's it. We did have a thread wondering if it was in the game about a year ago.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=128176&highlight=atomic+bomb

The historical battles represented in the game are mere shadows of the actual events for the most part, especially given the wacky air model.

[Soundman]

While this is only a game, we still would not have known about the dropping of "Little Boy" or "Fat Boy', very few did, and although it is true history and a real event, I still don't wish to see it simulated. Please don't accuse me of being a "soft liberal", I'm certainly not. Of course we did what we felt we had to do, and the past can't be changed. To the contrary, I was raised in a military family, and support our military wholeheartedly, but to this day, I only wish we would/could have had a less horriffic alternative.

BTW, Sorry..my intent is not to start some big debate issue here.. just my humble opinion. :DL

[Torplexed]

It's funny. We've gotten a lot of questions since the game came out asking if it's possible to ambush the Japanese carrier fleet as it steams toward Pearl Harbor. I guess it's hard for players to suppress advanced knowledge of events like Pearl Harbor, Midway or the A-bomb.

I always wondered if it's possible to see Mt. Fuji through your periscope in the game like many skippers did in real life. However, I have to assume it's not modeled as I'm certain someone would have posted a screen shot by now.

[rcjonessnp175]

Might have to go check that out .........

[andy_311]

Am there now in March 28 1945, 2miles SW of Hiroshima and not a lot to see apart from a ISE BB and a carrier and thats it and a lot of Jap planes buzzing around.

[Torplexed]

Am there now in March 28 1945, 2miles SW of Hiroshima and not a lot to see apart from a ISE BB and a carrier and thats it and a lot of Jap planes buzzing around.

The Hiroshima bomb didn't get dropped until August 1945.

[Onkel Neal]

Might have to go check that out .........

The race is on! First one with a screenshot of Mt. Fuji wins!

[Torplexed]

The race is on! First one with a screenshot of Mt. Fuji wins!

I don't suppose this counts. :D

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Quarters/4834/237.jpg

Okay...I'll fire up SH4 and go look. Fuji is generally southwest of Tokyo near Atami and Shizuoka. :cool:

[rubenandthejets]

Fuij is a monster mountain-3777m-and if it can be seen i game, anywhere off the coast of Tokyo Bay to Shizuoka should be good.

I can see it from Chiba on the far side of Tokyo Bay everyday, at a distance of 250+ kilometers.

[Torplexed]

Fuij is a monster mountain-3777m-and if it can be seen i game, anywhere off the coast of Tokyo Bay to Shizuoka should be good.

I can see it from Chiba on the far side of Tokyo Bay everyday, at a distance of 250+ kilometers.

I just fired up one of those single patrol scenarios that starts off the coast of Honshu. I checked the area out. No sign of the mountain although I did get blasted by a shore battery for my pains.

I tried using the external camera to search inland but found the ground just drops straight down to the sea like a facade when you go too far. That's probably why it's not there. My guess is that the game only models topography so far inland and then quits.

Must be an impressive sight in real life from Chiba. I see Mount Rainier everyday on my commute although it's not as pretty and symmetrical as Fuji.

[rubenandthejets]

Stunning, especially for an Australian, the flatest continent on earth. It's got that funny cold white stuff on it too. I think Mt Ranier is nicknamed Fuji, right?

[Torplexed]

Stunning, especially for an Australian, the flatest continent on earth. It's got that funny cold white stuff on it too. I think Mt Ranier is nicknamed Fuji, right?

Actually the mountain around here that most resembled Fuji in terms of it's shape and symmetry was Mt. St. Helens. But that certainly changed for the foreseeable future in 1980 when it committed volcano seppuku.

Mt. Rainier is a bit lumpier, but a bit higher than Fuji. (4392 meters)

http://www1.leg.wa.gov/documents/house/Members/CampbellMtRainier.jpg

[Midwinter]

At the risk of pulling us back onto the topic that everyone had so neatly manoeuvred away from, I have to say I agree with Soundman. I believe in seeking out peaceful solutions to conflict, but I'm no pacifist. I understand that military activity is sometimes the only viable route to take, but it should rarely be the first choice, and if there are other ways we should be exploring those thoroughly before we take up arms.

I know that this could potentially flare up the whole "should we be simulating war for fun" debate. So my take, very briefly:

Silent Hunter, and other war-based simulations, are entertaining, and maybe that's a little weird, when you think about it. Though like most other people, I'd much prefer the idea of wars being fought in simulation than for real. But this war really happened. Still, I say to myself that it's also educational in that, after spending several ingame hours attempting to escape from a flotilla of alerted destroyers, I think I have a better appreciation at least for the mechanics of what submariners had to face during the period. I'm not going to presume that I understand what they went through, that "I can relate" - but I can say that playing the game has made me think. And by and large I think that's a good thing.

And at its most basic level a game of this type is a challenge: this is your situation; these are your constraints; this is what you want to do. Now find a way to do it within those constraints.

So I'm not for one moment arguing against the simulation itself or the detail it presents. But. There is something about the idea of displaying the detonation of those weapons that I would find a little uncomfortable. Is that inconsistent? Is it irrational to think that way about one specific atrocity in a war of many atrocities? Maybe it is. But somehow, I think that certain events are significant not just for the number of people they killed - as if that's not bad enough - but for what they represent. In the case of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they were symbols that the world had changed - there was a new power in the world. War was no longer something that was (in principle at least if rarely in practice) restricted to the battlefield. While civilian casualties had always been inflicted and rationalised, suddenly we're faced with the most powerful weapon ever devised, and it was specifically designed to incinerate huge areas - and therefore huge numbers of people - in one strike. And if Little Boy and Fat Man weren't terrifying enough in themselves, they were the heralds of a new age of fear and brutality. We can argue over whether the detonations over Japan were justified in light of what the Japanese had done, but in the end their significance spread out far beyond the Pacific war and encompassed all of humanity, present and future.

I can't truly rationalise this. I'm maybe being oversensitive or too... what was it? Too 'bleeding-heart'. But no, I think we're better off for holding that particular event as something that is spoken of, but not seen in the game. It should, I think, bring pause. Whatever other reason I think we can offer as to why we choose to amuse ourselves with recreations of horrific situations, I think it's worth holding that particular event in a special place.

[hermanJnr.]

I can't truly rationalise this. I'm maybe being oversensitive or too... what was it? Too 'bleeding-heart'. But no, I think we're better off for holding that particular event as something that is spoken of, but not seen in the game. It should, I think, bring pause. Whatever other reason I think we can offer as to why we choose to amuse ourselves with recreations of horrific situations, I think it's worth holding that particular event in a special place.I think, respectfully, you're looking at it in the wrong light.

Without being too pretentious, games aren't just a form of entertainment, they are a form of artistic expression too.

Art is not just viewed for amusement, it is used to convey the whole human emotional spectrum.

If Hiroshima was put in the game, it wouldn't be for entertainment, it would (if done correctly), be a respectful rememberance of what a terrible event it was.

For example, while it does not depict real life events, have you ever played Call of Duty 4? At the end of the game, many of the main characters are killed alongside you, and you are powerless to help.

That's not done for amusement, it's done to convey a more serious message to the player.

There's a difference between mature artistic expression and sinking things for fun, though if done carefully and respectfully, it is possible to get across serious and thought-provoking messages to the player through an entertainment medium.

My two cents, anyway :)

[FIREWALL]

What makes any of you think there wasn't a sub their to photo the event if it could, and is still classified Top Secret.

There's still alot of classfied stuff from WWII today.

[quietguy52]

War is terrible, killing is wrong, etc, etc.

Playing this sim is not war, "sinking" colored pixels is not killing.

e n t e r t a i n m e n t

If something more is taken away from playing, such as knowledge of history, people or events... great.

If using this medium enhances our personal value of human rights and freedom, tremendous.

Gotta take this in perspective.

Just my 1/2 cent worth...

[Sailor Steve]

WELCOME ABOARD!:sunny:

At the risk of pulling us back onto the topic that everyone had so neatly manoeuvred away from...
Nothing neat about it - we wander like that all the time. Doesn't matter how it starts, but that's how it always ends.

I believe in seeking out peaceful solutions to conflict, but I'm no pacifist. I understand that military activity is sometimes the only viable route to take, but it should rarely be the first choice, and if there are other ways we should be exploring those thoroughly before we take up arms.
Well said. I agree completely.

I know that this could potentially flare up the whole "should we be simulating war for fun" debate.
It's been discussed before, so it's okay to shy away from it this time. Most of us agree with your summary that it's meant to be a learning experience. I don't think you were overly "bleeding-heart", or overly anything.

On the whole a great summary of the way most of us feel. Fantastic first post. I hope to see more.

[Rockin Robbins]

It's interesting to me that submarine veterans are also split on the issue of whether war gaming is appropriate. However, the ones who don't have a problem with it are reluctant to offend their fellow vets and the ones who object do so loudly. The surest way not to get any information is to sashay into a veterans' bulleting board, mention that you want some information to include in a Silent Hunter 4 scenario.

Those guys were afraid for their lives. They are very aware that the opinion of many wargamers is that the Japanese were toothless grandpapas. They don't like that. And they have a problem with playing at war anyway. It's an oxymoron to them that lost buddies there and can't conceive of going to war for fun, even if it's not real.

Playing Silent Hunter 4 is a symbolic gesture, and like all symbols, it is prone to ridicule, dismissal as demeaning to its object, trivialization, abuse and neglect.

[quietguy52]

"It's an oxymoron to them that lost buddies there and can't conceive of going to war for fun, even if it's not real."


I'm from the VN era... a vet.

And for me, as long as no one dies, no blood is let, and it's pixelated, I have no objection whatsoever. :03:

[Soundman]

There have been some stimulating comments in this thread, it does make for a good debate.. I suppose many of us will have various opinions on simulations. This may be a bit off subject, but I'd like to add that, for me, when I did play Silent Hunter III, I found it to be a very good game. I would (and still do) get very immersed in my sims, but with SHIII, following my usual fist pumps upon sinking American boats, somehow I found myself feeling a little guilty rooting for the other guys. I realize that seems silly. Just shows to go ya, how these "simulated" games can seem so real sometimes, at least briefly! I was so glad when SH4 came about and I could finally root for the good guys. :up: I doubt I'll ever go back to SH3 for those reasons alone.

[Etienne]

Some of you might remember a review of SHII when it came out : The reviewer blasted the game, not because it was buggy as all heck can be, but because you got to play the nazis, who supported slavery.

But there was hope, said the reviewer, as DC was shipping out soon (Hindsight: It took forever) and that would allow you, as the commander of an American destroyer, to blast other people playing the evil Germans out of the water in multiplayer (Hindsight: It didn't. Not for a long time, anyway)

I wish I could find that review; it barely ever mentionned anything about the actual game, just how nazis were, you know, evil.

[FIREWALL]

It's a Sim GAME !!! Not meant for little kids or sceemish adults. :hmph:

I hope a modder has the balls to make an A-bomb go off in Hiroshima at the right time mod.

Real simple no- brainer. If you don't like it , Don't download it.

[Dread Knot]

I wish I could find that review; it barely ever mentionned anything about the actual game, just how nazis were, you know, evil.

yeah...sounds like he saw an older generation of movies where the crew goose-steps through a huge, spacious U-Boat and the clean-shaven Prussian captain is in an immaculate uniform all the time.

I don't want to see the A-bomb flash. It'll fry your eyes out.

[Madox58]

It's a Sim GAME !!! Not meant for little kids or sceemish adults. :hmph:

I hope a modder has the balls to make an A-bomb go off in Hiroshima at the right time mod.

Real simple no- brainer. If you don't like it , Don't download it.

The blast is just a simple re-work of a Partical Generator.
Create a new Air Unit with an animation of the bomb release
attached to it.
Script it right and you have the whole effect.

Viewing from a sub?
It is very impressive.

Fly in to do a close up and it becomes rather nasty looking
and blotchy.

Adjusting for a 'In the blast radius' view?
It brings my system to it's knees!

[FIREWALL]

The blast is just a simple re-work of a Partical Generator.
Create a new Air Unit with an animation of the bomb release
attached to it.
Script it right and you have the whole effect.

Viewing from a sub?
It is very impressive.

Fly in to do a close up and it becomes rather nasty looking
and blotchy.

Adjusting for a 'In the blast radius' view?
It brings my system to it's knees!

It won't mine . Would you consider sending me the mod in a PM.

I would be honored to test and send you back a CLASSIFIED report.

[Franklin Van Valkenburg]

This might have been said before... but its ironic - the Tokyo firebombs killed more people than both atomic bombs.
Just felt like pointing that out... not saying it renders the a-bombs lesser in horrific capability, because it was the fact that one bomb could do so much - the fear factor. That and the fact that war had become so indiscriminate and it lacked true human connection... just push a button and kill thousands.

I see the developer's reasoning behind not showing this event, but I'd show it because of this is supposed to be a WWII simulation, you'd need to include all its events. It would be like cutting out Pearl Harbor if the game started before December 7th, 1941. I'd show it because that's what happened... we need to be reminded... and we should not forget or be sheltered from the reality of history.

[Madox58]

It won't mine . Would you consider sending me the mod in a PM.

I would be honored to test and send you back a CLASSIFIED report.

I'll let you know.
It might be 'classified information'
:03:
If I decide to submit it.
:hmmm:

Anyway.
I'll have to rebuild it.
I deleted it awhile back.

It's a simple job though.
Once you start playing with Particals?
It can get addicting.
Almost as bad as doing Animations.
:rock:

[woody4077]

to soundman and others

in reality the a-bombs were dropped on japan to SAVE lives.

seems strange but i saw something on history channel awhile
back about the US plans for an invasion of Japan that
would have cost ALOT of US soliders their lives.

in fact check out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall
for more info

[peabody]

I see the developer's reasoning behind not showing this event, but I'd show it because of this is supposed to be a WWII simulation, you'd need to include all its events. It would be like cutting out Pearl Harbor if the game started before December 7th, 1941. I'd show it because that's what happened... we need to be reminded... and we should not forget or be sheltered from the reality of history.

And as you no doubt noticed, the game does NOT start before December 7th. Maybe the same reason they don't have an A-Bomb?

Peabody

[Madox58]

Your Game doesn't.
My Game does.

[FIREWALL]

Your Game doesn't.
My Game does.


So does mine. The modders need to get together and make a Chicken Little mod for SH3 and SH4. Garenteed to be PC. :haha:

[rcjonessnp175]

I agree with what firewall has said, this is a sim, a sim of the biggest war known to man, the most violent and the most important, if you cant handle certain realistic realities in present day or in history then dont download a mod that may prove a problem for you.
In regards to chicken little would be awesome to help escort the carrier group into position and watch the daring takeoff of the b25s, may not be pure historic fact or what not but still.

One last comment, people well society tends to forget very quickly the attacks that out country has endured never forget:salute:

Jonesy

[peabody]

Well, mine does not start before Dec 7. I don't know what all the Chicken Little was about, but all I was pointing out is the developers didn't put in certain things. And maybe for a reason. If you are trying to sell a sim which is a small market to start with, you need to be careful about stepping on toes. Otherwise you have shelves full of unsold games. I was not giving an opinion one way or the other what should be in the game.

Peabody

[rcjonessnp175]

Its an unfortunate reality that political correctness has infiltrated every domain of entertainment.:damn:

[Rockin Robbins]

I think the reasoning has more to do with deciding what is a wise use of resources. Do they spend their time dropping an irrelevant to submarine operations piece of eye candy on Hiroshima or programming the cutie into the game. Mount Fuji or better wave action for exterior views? Are they going to create a hundred different types of target that the average player will never see?

What's the average computer going to be able to do running the game? Will they have to set graphics settings so far back the particles won't be visible anyway? Will they do the macho thing and turn the particles up to maximum and watch their computer freeze for fifteen minutes when their computer is nuked at Hiroshima?

Does it add to the gameplay experience? Do we have the time to do it? What will it do to game performance? Those, much more than political correctness, are likely to have been the questions that resulted in a lack of Hiroshima and Fuji in our game.

Sexy conspiracy theories are fun but most often have very little to do with reality.

[Soundman]

I think the reasoning has more to do with deciding what is a wise use of resources. Do they spend their time dropping an irrelevant to submarine operations piece of eye candy on Hiroshima or programming the cutie into the game. Mount Fuji or better wave action for exterior views? Are they going to create a hundred different types of target that the average player will never see?

What's the average computer going to be able to do running the game? Will they have to set graphics settings so far back the particles won't be visible anyway? Will they do the macho thing and turn the particles up to maximum and watch their computer freeze for fifteen minutes when their computer is nuked at Hiroshima?

Does it add to the gameplay experience? Do we have the time to do it? What will it do to game performance? Those, much more than political correctness, are likely to have been the questions that resulted in a lack of Hiroshima and Fuji in our game.

Sexy conspiracy theories are fun but most often have very little to do with reality.

Well said. :up:

[SteamWake]

I dont know, its a submarine game I believe that the developers put time and effort into the naval aspects of the game.

If some modder wants to pour hundreds of hours into simulating an event that lasted minutes (visually speaking) more power to them.

Id rather see efforts on things like seperate engine controls and the like.

Now when I played a modern day stealth bomber game the un-availabilty of nuclear ordinance was bothersome.

[Rockin Robbins]

Well you've hit on the flipside of what I said. I'm convinced they made decisions to leave some things for modders to work out. Before the release of SH4UBM they said as much and asked us what we needed them to do that was hardcoded and what we would like to have left to us. Overwhelmingly we said fix the hardcoded stuff and leave the eyecandy and even some of the functionality to the modders, so long as the solution is able to be modded. They did a great job!

[Soundman]

Let me say if someone would enjoy watching a simulated bomb going off, more power to them, just not my cup'O'tea. I have nothing against it, I just don't understand the reward. We already know what it looks like from watching actual films, how is watching it simulated here going to look better than watching the real thing? This might be a different story if we're talking flight sims, but this has absolutely nothing to do with submarine simulation. I just don't get it, but to each his own, what ever floats your boat :haha: (pun intended). I suppose someone who served in a real sub might not get the SH4 experience either! :hmmm:

[Madox58]

Actually?
It should be a Yes or No answer.
:haha:

All the rest is opinion.
Read the first post.
"Has anyone get close enough to see Little Boy fall in Hiroshima on August 6th 1945?"
:hmmm:
:haha:

[rubenandthejets]

Problem is getting close enough to see if it does or doesnt happen means getting past Ol' Bungo Pete and about a zillion search planes with about 2 inches under the keel the whole time.

For the sake of my crew (and my own skin ) I'll just hear about it on the radio.

[MonTana_Prussian]

Problem is getting close enough to see if it does or doesnt happen means getting past Ol' Bungo Pete and about a zillion search planes with about 2 inches under the keel the whole time.

For the sake of my crew (and my own skin ) I'll just hear about it on the radio.

I'm with you on this one! It's bad enough when you have orders to go in there,let alone a sightseeing tour:88)

[Torplexed]

Has anyone determined if the months of conventional and then firebombing attacks on Japan with B-29s that preceded the A-bomb are even simulated? A lot of subs had to pull lifeguard duty for those raids and the US carrier strikes on the Inland Sea so it'd make more sense to include them.

[JALU3]

I imagine they would be. Gotta see the aerial bombing of Guam prior to the invasion, and picked up a couple pilots aftewards. However, if done accurately, and using the same attack schedule as in real life is hard to say.