DW is showing its age. It's rearing its ugly graphics.

[Castout]

Been quite some time since I played DW the last time.
DW is showing its age now on my widescreen monitor
If it only supported widescreen resolution at high resolution it could breathe some more life into it even with 16 bit graphics.

....sad Sonalysts has decided to jump the ship on games...
now they are responsible for making the younger gamer generation losing some IQ points by not presenting alternative to repetitive mind numbing shooter and simplistic RTS . . .

Anyway I just feel l need to vent this feeling....I feel we need a 'new DW'. There are only few games which bring me fond memories playing them and SC and DW were one of them. Whenever I feel alone in my campus dorm especially at fridays or weekends I would just fire up SC even when I actually wasn't really playing it just lying on my bed listening to the in game music thinking to myself I'm not alone my crews are with me lol. Oh the good old days. Love the in game music. I was a broke student but happy now Im broke and unhappy lol. With no near probability of a new game from Sonalysts....
:damn:

[Onkel Neal]

....sad Sonalysts has decided to jump the ship on games...
now they are responsible for making the younger gamer generation losing some IQ points by not presenting alternative to repetitive mind numbing shooter and simplistic RTS . . .



No, you cannot blame Sonalysts, they made four outstanding modern naval sims. They did not sell enough copies to warrant further game development. That's our fault as customers.

[goldorak]

No, you cannot blame Sonalysts, they made four outstanding modern naval sims. They did not sell enough copies to warrant further game development. That's our fault as customers.

Yes and no. Yes the game was a commercial failure but not because of us who bought it but because the "brainwashed masses" just didn't get it.
Which brings me to the second point, when you're going to sell something to someone make sure you give him what he wants (at least in part). Bringing a game with a 10 years old graphics engine was not a good decision. Say what you want, but the first thing to hook people to games is "eye candy".
Once you have them on the hook, you can go on saying how realisitic the simulator is etc, etc, etc... but until that point you have got to do everything in your power to excite new players.

[goldorak]

Been quite some time since I played DW the last time.
DW is showing its age now on my widescreen monitor
If it only supported widescreen resolution at high resolution it could breathe some more life into it even with 16 bit graphics.



At the time nobody (even gaint publishers such as EA, Ubisoft, etc...) was adding support for widescreen monitors. So SCS is not to fault here.
And as for high resolution, the game goes up to 1600x1200 which is pretty high, unless you're wanting to play on a 30 inch monitor which is preposterous.
Now since the game doesn't have native support for widescreen (and may i say that a lot of classic pc games don't have support for widescreen it doesn't make them any less classic and enjoyable ;) ) hardware comes to the rescue. Either your graphics card or your monitor should have the option to maintain the correct 4:3 aspect ratio on a widescreen monitor. That means that you'll have black bars on the right and left but the image will not be distorted.

[Molon Labe]

Yes and no. Yes the game was a commercial failure but not because of us who bought it but because the "brainwashed masses" just didn't get it.
Which brings me to the second point, when you're going to sell something to someone make sure you give him what he wants (at least in part). Bringing a game with a 10 years old graphics engine was not a good decision. Say what you want, but the first thing to hook people to games is "eye candy".
Once you have them on the hook, you can go on saying how realisitic the simulator is etc, etc, etc... but until that point you have got to do everything in your power to excite new players.

These are both good points, but they're in opposition to each other. If you use graphics as a hook, then the people you bring in are exactly the people who just don't get it. And then you get even more reviews like the one we got on Attack of the Show or whatever the hell that was.

[goldorak]

These are both good points, but they're in opposition to each other. If you use graphics as a hook, then the people you bring in are exactly the people who just don't get it. And then you get even more reviews like the one we got on Attack of the Show or whatever the hell that was.


No no they are not in opposition. You have to think in terms of a "school analogy". Kids are naturally curious beings, but many times its difficult to get their attention. So what do you do ? You try to get them excited about something that sparks their curiosity. Now that doesn't mean that every kid will stay and pay attention, but many will.
Gamers are not idiots, even those that like to play fps or rts or game genres that typically have nothing to do with military simulations. Many don't know wether they will like a game such as Falcon 4 or DW until they have learned about it or try it out. And it is in this phase that you have to capture their attention. Sure many will say I don't like it, but some will say I didn't know this genre but it looks iteresting. I'll give it a try. Publishers, even niche publishers have nothing to loose to hook these players, and everything to gain. But you have got to get them to at least have a passing look on your game, and that cost is graphics.

[Castout]

It's sad that most people do not want to play games that require them to learn.

They just want to jump right in to the game.

I mean games that let you jump right in usually don't offer much that's why you can just jump right in while games that require you to learn usually offers more strategic or tactical depth or both that simpler games don't offer to its players.

I like DW and SC very much and I don't get it why the masses don't.

@Goldorak I just knew it from you DW could support 1600x resolution.:). I've been playign with 1024x800 resolution and tyhat's why it's so jaggy.

[Sea Demon]

they made four outstanding modern naval sims. They did not sell enough copies to warrant further game development. That's our fault as customers.


Yes. Sonalyst's games have been very enjoyable. But how is it "our" fault? Where did we go wrong? :-? Unfortunately, I have a hard time assigning blame to anybody. I did see Sonalysts take some steps to better their chances to make the game profitable with the first publishing effort (Battlefront). They tried to offer customers incentives to buy with the hopes of added playables as well. I think they were also hoping each of us would help "sell" the game to other interested parties such as friends and associates. Too bad it didn't work out like they wanted it too.

[smithcorp]

I saw this thread over at SimHQ ages ago and wondered if anything had come of it. I don't mind the graphics (they don't turn me off the game - how good do the graphics of a sonar screen need to be?) for DW but I would be interested in getting it to fit better on by 1400x900 LCD monitor.

Does anyone know if this potential workaround/toolkit would work with DW?

Thread here: http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2646240/Searchpage/1/Main/278277/Words/resolution/Search/true/Re_Dangerous_Waters_Screen_Res.html#Post2646240

[Castout]

I can tell you that that workaround didn't work for SH3 for me :DL

[smithcorp]

And I've since confirmed it didn't work for DW either. Pity.

[Blacklight]

I think that even WITH hot graphics, this game would have sold poorly. All the kids (who are the majority of the gameing market) heard about a 500 page manual, they'd run away screaming. The majority of the ones who would actually buy the game would probably be bored as it's not an arcade game with constant action and explosions jumping out at you every five secconds.
There just aren't enough of us to really keep this niche market afloat very well. Most of us are NOT the typical target consumer for video games.

[Task Force]

I think that even WITH hot graphics, this game would have sold poorly. All the kids (who are the majority of the gameing market) heard about a 500 page manual, they'd run away screaming. The majority of the ones who would actually buy the game would probably be bored as it's not an arcade game with constant action and explosions jumping out at you every five secconds.
There just aren't enough of us to really keep this niche market afloat very well. Most of us are NOT the typical target consumer for video games.

Not all kids are that way... (Just alot of them.)

[688iGuy]

I think Microsoft Flight Simulator is the perfect example of the successful complex-sim business model. Eye popping graphics for the simple minded consumer, yet a highly complex and realistic simulation for the dedicated fans. With the exception of maybe flying an ultralight, I would say that game is just as difficult, if not more so, to learn, yet people buy it, including kids. Why? Graphics.


Its the same reason nobody buys Sega Genesis games anymore, people don't want to buy yesterdays technology.


It's not a matter of market. There are just as many Tom Clancy reading, naval oriented individuals out there as there are casual propeller heads, but they need to be drawn in.


Sonalysts shot themselves in the foot with this one by offering piss-poor graphics. The dedicated fan who will buy a game regardless of visuals is a very small market for ANY sim. Take away Flight Simulators graphics and I'm sure its fate would be the same as DW.



Not to mention I think the campaign was very weak, the game was riddled with bugs, etc etc. They half-assed it.


Don't get me wrong, I love the game and am one of the few dedicated consumers would have bought this game regardless, but Sonalysts messed this up, not us, and not the masses for not accepting crappy graphics. The blame falls squarely on Sonalysts. They blew it for all of us.

[Molon Labe]

You can only do so much with a limited budget. More attention to graphics would have meant less attention to the simulation. And then we'd just have another Silent Hunter or something.

[Blacklight]

I wouldn't call the graphics piss poor. I've seen a LOT worse from more modern games.

Dangerous Waters has more the feel of a military simulator with it's graphics. They made it look like the real naval training sims at the time looked.
Besides. The focus of the game is a naval simulation where you're looking at the various stations (which I think are rendered beautifully). Not on the eye candy on the outside.

[Castout]

I think that even WITH hot graphics, this game would have sold poorly. All the kids (who are the majority of the gameing market) heard about a 500 page manual, they'd run away screaming. The majority of the ones who would actually buy the game would probably be bored as it's not an arcade game with constant action and explosions jumping out at you every five secconds.
There just aren't enough of us to really keep this niche market afloat very well. Most of us are NOT the typical target consumer for video games.

Now that is what I called pessimism.

I mean look at Silent Hunter 3. It was successful. and the campaign requires you to transit a long way and lots of nothing's happening in between sinking.

[goldorak]

I wouldn't call the graphics piss poor. I've seen a LOT worse from more modern games.

Dangerous Waters has more the feel of a military simulator with it's graphics. They made it look like the real naval training sims at the time looked.
Besides. The focus of the game is a naval simulation where you're looking at the various stations (which I think are rendered beautifully). Not on the eye candy on the outside.


No no, 688 Fast Attack was released some years prior to DW, and even considering the limitations of the time it had 2d stations much more realistic than what we have in DW.
Nobody was asking for DW to sports a SH3-like engine, but for pete's sake will you at least not recycle a 10 year old graphics engine ?
Or if push comes to shove at least update the critical parts such as throwing the 16 bit color out the window and use instead 24-32 bit color. They went cheap, real cheap on the graphics, even on the fonts !!!!
Really have a look at Sub Command, the fonts on the interface of the game (not the 2d stations) are much more polished than what we have in DW.

[Castout]

No no, 688 Fast Attack was released some years prior to DW, and even considering the limitations of the time it had 2d stations much more realistic than what we have in DW.
Nobody was asking for DW to sports a SH3-like engine, but for pete's sake will you at least not recycle a 10 year old graphics engine ?
Or if push comes to shove at least update the critical parts such as throwing the 16 bit color out the window and use instead 24-32 bit color. They went cheap, real cheap on the graphics, even on the fonts !!!!
Really have a look at Sub Command, the fonts on the interface of the game (not the 2d stations) are much more polished than what we have in DW.

Perhaps Silent Hunter V would tackle cold war era :DL. My mouth is watering. Though SH IV was a flop.

[goldorak]

Perhaps Silent Hunter V would tackle cold war era :DL. My mouth is watering. Though SH IV was a flop.

Nah, at this point in time I just enjoy DW with all its crappy graphics.
Lwami, Alfa Tau and RA really redeem the game, even with subpar graphics and all.

[Shearwater]

Okay, time to throw in my two cents :)
First of all, graphics: IMHO, I don't think that the graphics in DW or SC are actually that bad. In any case, I don't think that they are so bad as to ruin gameplay. In fact, I think that the platform models are actually nicely done; at least enough to enable the player to conduct a visual identification ;)
As a matter of fact, I'm running the sim (DW, that is) on a laptop computer which wasn't even state of the art at the time I bought it - 1,7 GHz, 512 MB, and a GeForce 440 Go, which doesn't even support DX 9 effects. As a result, the water in DW doesn't look like you're used to on the screenshots, but more like a wobbling blue mass of tinfoil :DL But still, I'm not complaining - even though it would be nice if I had the shaded graphics (like probably everyone else). Given that fact, the water graphics in SC look even a bit better than in DW, but this is due to my hardware.

A huge complaint I have against a lot of recent (or not-so-recent-anymore) games is that they demand one beast of a computer to run on properly. FSX was mentioned, and I think this game is a paragon of absurdity. Seriously: By the time it was published (and I think even now), no one can run it with all the sliders set to maximum and still get a decent frame rate. And I personally don't want to buy a new computer every two or three years, even IF I could afford it (which I can't). I very much prefer a game which perhaps doesn't have state of the art graphics, but runs smoothly, over one which doesn't run properly, or not at all.

I'm glad that DW still works on my computer, although I still have some technical issues with the game/sim/whatever. The sound stutters from time to time or the sonar guy tells me something like "new contact bearing 220 designated sierra 3" about twenty times until I turn the sound off :cool:. Also, I find it quite annoying that even with the 1.04 patch, there still seem to be some bugs - why on earth do I get the "The mission cannot be completed. Report for debrief."-message on the very first mission of the campaign if I use the 688(i)? Is there some "by the way, don't use the 688 because you will be detected immediately"-section in the briefing which I didn't get?

However, I think that there are a couple of other issues which deter people from playing games like DW. One huge complaint is accessibility. Of course, there's a huge manual. I recently ordered it through the subsim page (can't wait to get it :D), but I've already read parts of it, and I must say that it doesn't make the game any easier. There's the old complaint of "It tells you about the what, but not the why". I've read the landlubber's guide, which I found extremely helpful, and am currently working myself through the Orion guide, but honestly: Such things should be put in a manual of a commercially oriented product if people hope to attract people which aren't already entrenched in the matter. It's great to have such guides, but I really don't think that it ought to be the job of the Subsim community to help out new players who don't have a suggestion of a faint and distant clue. Saying that, I absolutely don't mean that such games should be dumbed down! All I want is a proper documentation. For example, there should be sections included like "How to conduct a torpedo attack" or "how to conduct recon missions with the P3" or something like that. If it weren't for the great subsim community, I probably would have lost interest long ago - which I think is a pity.

To sum it up: Make the sim accessible to people who are interested, but uninformed. People who like the subject matter of the game can live with average, even poor graphics, since hardcore sims are already few and far between, but you have to do something to make them stay.

Oh, and by the way: Since this is my very first post here on the forum, I'd like to present my compliments to everyone on this great website :)

[Rip]

Welcome aboard mate!

You have come to the right place. Once you get properly indoctrinated I expect you will find the game superb. Just ask away and you will find plenty of answers many coming from people like myself who have actually been there and done the job.

:yeah:

[Imamar]

Wow. People really have something crawling under their skin for sure.

I love DW graphics. It suits the purpose.

What is this "we who play military sims are better than those and those?"

You won't get any more stripes to your jacket, playing these.

This is maybe, the greatest reason why younger people don't come to these kind of games so often. This attitude, what this thread is so full of.

If you want to get stripes go to army, run a marathon, bench press over 120kg, GET LAID MORE OFTEN.

This is so smelly thread, i can even taste it in my mouth. YAK!

[Castout]

What? :haha:.

What's wrong with you mate?

Just that some of us wish DW would not be the last of its kind. What's wrong with that? We love subsims. Who says sub sim or sim lovers are better people than say FPS gamers? we just wish that more people willing to invest some time and effort to try simming games. If some of us think we are somehow better than fps gamers then that is their personal opinion. No need to take offence. Anyway I don't think anyone think that way just that we complained that so few people seem to be interested in siumlation kind of games because they need to learn the game and not just jump right into it anyhow. And this is again a personal opinion yet validated by the failure and rarirty of simming games out there.

[Imamar]

Bad day in marshmallow land :haha:

[Shearwater]

What is this "we who play military sims are better than those and those?"


I don't think I have that kind of attidude, but you do have a point mate. On the other hand, it's maybe a bit stretching the point to assume that (self-perceived) hard-core simmers are significantly more pretentious. In fact, a whole lot of people on this forum are willing to help. Just look at the posts :)

As for the lifting-weights-and-getting-laid-part: If I had a) the constitution and b) the opportunity to do that, I wouldn't spend my time playing video games, would I? ;)

All that said, just remember we're only talking about games here! :up:

[OptimusX]

I'd be happy if a graphics port like SCX II existed for DW.

The SCX II graphics were very, very clean for their time...and much more accurate! With stock graphics the Akula looks like a Victor III and the Typhoon is fugly...

[goldorak]

I'd be happy if a graphics port like SCX II existed for DW.

The SCX II graphics were very, very clean for their time...and much more accurate! With stock graphics the Akula looks like a Victor III and the Typhoon is fugly...

Well well well, you must not have been reading about the RA or AT 3 mods.
Have a look at the modding forum. :salute:

[Fleet Command CC]

No, you cannot blame Sonalysts, they made four outstanding modern naval sims. They did not sell enough copies to warrant further game development. That's our fault as customers.

Yep I agree, well said Neal Stevens. :up:

Would be nice if Sonalysts made a new Fleet Command that would be cool. :salute:

[goldorak]

Yep I agree, well said Neal Stevens. :up:

Would be nice if Sonalysts made a new Fleet Command that would be cool. :salute:

Yeah whatever, its always the customers fault nowadays isn't it ? :nope:
SCS didn't understand the market it was catering to, either die hard naval enthusiasts or the more general market.
It developed the sim based on the former premise and marketed it according to the later premise. Their second strategic error was not recognising what other sims were out there and why people liked them.
Silent Hunter 3 was not more easy than DW, in fact played with all the realism settings to maximum it was just as difficult. Manual tma, plotting solutions etc... But it captured a large part of the market (die hard fans and new comers) because of a really nice graphics engine. Ubisoft invested in SH3 and it payed off, SCS didn't invest as much as they should in DW and it showed.
Is it a wonder than the game hadn't sold as they had estimated ?
:salute:

[Nexus7]

About the success of the SH series: don't underestimate the faschion (err... fashination) that WW2 itself brings to the people (still today) :yep:

DW doesn't have this trigger to customers.

[Nexus7]

About the Graphics engine. I am one of those that don't care a darn about graphics in a sub simulator. For me graphics come far behind in the list of fun factors.

Molon Labe is very right in saying that hot graphics would trigger exactly the wrong people, rough / spartan graphics instead will attract the right people, as they are an hint for care for the game mechanics (the juice, and not the superficial, visible things).

My best moments with SC or DW:
- multiplayer battles where you start to think you are able to guess your opponent's next move ! (this can really happen)
- outsmart your human opponent
- successful tactical decisions (better than your enemy)
- the thrill and the stress of the PING PING when you have to prepare for evasion and at the same prepare a counter attack
- organize the efforts of a multicrew platform for the objective and have everyone doing his part with competence and enthusiasm

just to name a few...

But to have the best experience, you have to pass the obstacle consisting in learning the (difficult) game mechanics. Me myself, with SC, at the begin I was about to give it up. Just after several attempts i started learning the basics anfd enjoing the game... at the beginning it was rather frustrating (am i so dumb or does the game sux? )

As for graphical catcher, I think there's nothing best than a picture of the Broad Band sonar with some contacts fading, or some fire control station (i.e. of the Akula), that shows the complexity and the level of detail (again, not graphical detail)

[goldorak]

About the success of the SH series: don't underestimate the faschion that WW2 itself brings to the people (still today) :yep:

DW doesn't have this trigger to customers.

It doesn't make sense, years ago cold war sims sold very well.
Sierra Fast Attack for instance has 2d stations (in svga resolution !!!!) that are more "real" than what we get in DW.
Even Silent Hunter I had 2d stations that are more "real" than DW's.
Really there is no hiding, DW was first and foremost a technology demonstrator for the US Navy.
It was never developed as a game, and therefore never received the attention to detail it deserved to be marketed as a game for the general video game player.
Dont' think I hate DW, in fact I like it a lot, even moreso with RA or Alfa Tau but you must realise that what we have is basically an unfished game.

[goldorak]

Nexus you're forgetting the "whole experience".
I mean if fidelity was all that mattered we would have flight sims that concentrated on instruments and procedures instead of letting you gaze out the canopy and admire the 3d-world.
A simulator is not and end in itself, its just a brick in giving the player the "simulated experience" of being there.
And that means that even if you stare at 2d stations all day long, you want those 2d stations to be rendered nicely, you want the sounds you hear on broadband to be realistic. You want to hear realistic emergency "dive dive" voices, alarms etc....
You want to be able to 3d-navigate a virtual submarine etc, etc, etc....
When you look throught the periscope you want to see a nice rendered ocean, nice clouds, rain, etc... and nice ships not the 2d blocks we have right now.
There are so many things that could improve the game experience in DW that
just boggles the mind.
Some people don't want to accept the fact that DW was done as a low cost project. It was never to be a game, and if you look at the time Sub Command came out, well that game is much more polished than DW will ever be.

[Nexus7]

Nexus you're forgetting the "whole experience".
I mean if fidelity was all that mattered we would have flight sims that concentrated on instruments and procedures instead of letting you gaze out the canopy and admire the 3d-world.
A simulator is not and end in itself, its just a brick in giving the player the "simulated experience" of being there.
And that means that even if you stare at 2d stations all day long, you want those 2d stations to be rendered nicely, you want the sounds you hear on broadband to be realistic. You want to hear realistic emergency "dive dive" voices, alarms etc....
You want to be able to 3d-navigate a virtual submarine etc, etc, etc....
When you look throught the periscope you want to see a nice rendered ocean, nice clouds, rain, etc... and nice ships not the 2d blocks we have right now.
There are so many things that could improve the game experience in DW that
just boggles the mind.
Some people don't want to accept the fact that DW was done as a low cost project. It was never to be a game, and if you look at the time Sub Command came out, well that game is much more polished than DW will ever be.

You hardly can compare a flight simulator and a sub simulator: the people aboard a sub will hardly see a 2D sun for months lol. Even the commander will pass very little of his time at the periscope station... for sure he won't be able to see his boat from different angles like you actually can in DW... won't be able to see explosions below the surface either... He will need his ears (sensors) to know what happens. That means, DW already offers more than due on graphics.

What are realistic songs on BB ?
What is a realistic "dive dive" signal ?
What do you mean with realistic alarms ?

I second you when you say DW is unfinished. Even SC had to be patched several times to come to a good level (V1.08 ?)
For this, there is a reason to be angry with Sonalyst, at least for those who spent 60 $ like me.