Features in SH1 and Aces That Have Since "Disappeared"

[Subnuts]

So we've all been mourning the loss of the last two years of the war and every other boat except the VII. I sympathize with that. But it got me thinking: what did those "golden oldie" subsims I, and many of you, played for hundreds of hours "back in the days," have that the new crop doesn't?

As it turns out, a lot.

Please note that I'm referring to the OOB versions of SH3 and SH4, without mods. I'm just going to ignore SH2 altogether (I'm sure most of us have forgotten it...but not entirely forgiven it.)

Feel free to add to this list. I'm sure it's nowhere near complete.

In both sims:



Tenacious escorts that don't give up after 45 minutes.



Realistic damage repair times - fixing a diesel could take hours or even days, not minutes.
Interviews, submarine photo tours, and historical background info included on the CD.
ASDIC that behaved as it did in real life.
Submarine types that felt radically different from one another (the Fleet Boats in SH1 all had their unique qualities; in SH4, they're all kind of samey.)
Large, readable depth, speed, and course gauges.
Cut-scenes and newspaper headlines after your patrol if you've been killed, captured, promoted, or awarded a medal.
Working time compression.
Propeller sounds that seemed realistically loud - a destroyer passing overhead doesn't sound like a flea buzz, folks.
A sonar guy who isn't deaf.
Ability to bottom sub without continuously incurring damage.
Possibility of chlorine gas release due to flooding reaching the batteries.
More accurate compressed air usage.
Comprehensive quick mission generator.
50 or more historic single missions included straight out of the box.
Abandon ship option.
Manuals that focused on gameplay, rather than extraneous fluff.
Ability to play without an internet connection.
Possibility of fog in calm seas.
Bottoming the boat makes you harder to detect early-war.
Damage control screen that actually explains how the damage effects your ability to operate.
Enemy patrol planes that operate independently rather than in entire squadrons.


In Aces:


Wolfpacks (duh!)
Radio traffic from BDU and other boats.
Air-dropped homing torpedoes from Allied aircraft, and Foxer torpedo decoys.
Updates on the progress of the war (i.e., the bar).
Convoys that could be detected on hydrophones from up to 50 miles away.
"Smoke on the horizon, Captain!"
Possibility of getting your boat stuck in the mud.
Shaft damage effecting underwater stealthiness.
Silent running rendering pumps useless.
Leaking when diving below 180 meters.
Ability to empty bilges using compressed air.
Randomized tonnage for merchants instead of a fixed displacement - a "small merchant" could vary anywhere between 1,000 and 2,500 tons.


In SH1:


Ships that maneuvered realistically to evade steam torpedoes, not accelerating to 20 knots in 5 seconds and double-backing into the torpedo they were trying to avoid.
AI submarines with torpedoes.
Easily readable radar display with SD and SJ radars that worked as advertised and were reasonably historically accurate.
An idiot-proof interface with nice 2D panels, rather than clicking through menus in SH3 or deciphering religious symbols in SH4.
A single TDC panel, without an "attack map" behind it.
The ability to jettison debris.
Ability to start a career any month between December 1941 and August 1945
A versatile periscope interface that could show maneuvering gauges or TDC elements.
An ID manual with different warship types sorted by their type (BB, CA, DD, etc.), along with information on their armament.
A calendar with sunrise, sunset, moon rise, moon set, and moon phase information.
A working bathythermograph and randomized thermoclines.
Ability to turn red lights on and off.
Credit for ships damaged in single missions.
Ability to use "high scope" technique.
Detailed mission editor included with Commander's Edition.
Ability to abandon ship while stuck on the bottom in shallow water (see USS Tang)
Possibility of damage to electric motors due to flooding.
Calendar with lunar phases, moon and sun rise and set times, and the weather.

[Ducimus]

Sad, isn't it?

[razark]

For SHI, a manual that actually describes the game, the war, the real submarines and tactics, in part written by an actual sub commander.

A calendar with sunrise, sunset, moon rise, moon set, and moon phase information.

Bathythermograph. Air search radar that only displayed range and not bearing. Ability to turn on/off red lights. Abandon ship option. Surface radar that detects land masses. Compressed air. The ability to bottom the sub. In AotD, the ability to get the sub stuck in the mud. Chlorine gas from flooding reaching the batteries. The bar in AotD.

Just a few missing things.

Edit: Ack! How could I forget, from AotD, "Smoke on the horizon!"

[dcb]

Plus I remember in the old SH1, I was also credited for the ships I damaged, but did not sink.

[jazman]

You guys are ruining my day.

[Obltn Strand]

Escort strenght of convoys and possibility of finding unescorted ones:arrgh!: when historically appropiate.

[Capt. Morgan]

SH1:

Thermoclines were randomized, you never knew if there was one, and at what depth, until you made a test dive. They also changed depth over time/distance.

Raising the periscope on the surface gave you greater visual range.

Ran beautifully on Linux via Dosbox (and Winders too, I guess)

Now Flight Simulator, They know how to upgrade their sim. I've had most every version from Flight simulator II (for the Commie 64) to Microsoft's FS9, and in every new release, they've always just added new features, and never removed old ones.

[kptn_kaiserhof]

and the very first 3d control room but no crew

[d@rk51d3]

Remember getting prop and/or shaft damage that would give your position away, if you tried to sneak away while damaged?

[V.C. Sniper]

Both have simple graphics that doesn't require the amount of time needed to build and maintain like the graphics of today, therefore more time can be spent on adding new realistic/simulation features.



SAD. Developers have to reinvent the wheel everytime a new game is being developed and forgot much of what was learned from building previous games.

[Lanzfeld]

This is sad as ****!

I fell in love with subsims for all the above reasons and now all those reasons are gone because some needledicks feel they always have to reinvent the wheel to impress the A.D.D. idiots of the world.:nope:

I want Aces back with modern graphics...THAT IS ALL!!!!:damn:

[sayaret]

SH1 lot of stock and even more custom made historic scenarios.

[Hartmann]

So we've all been mourning the loss of the last two years of the war and every other boat except the VII. I sympathize with that. But it got me thinking: what did those "golden oldie" subsims I, and many of you, played for hundreds of hours "back in the days," have that the new crop doesn't?

As it turns out, a lot.

Please note that I'm referring to the OOB versions of SH3 and SH4, without mods. I'm just going to ignore SH2 altogether (I'm sure most of us have forgotten it...but not entirely forgiven it.)

Feel free to add to this list. I'm sure it's nowhere near complete.

In both sims:



Tenacious escorts that don't give up after 45 minutes.



Realistic damage repair times - fixing a diesel could take hours or even days, not minutes.
Interviews, submarine photo tours, and historical background info included on the CD.
ASDIC that behaved as it did in real life.
Submarine types that felt radically different from one another (the Fleet Boats in SH1 all had their unique qualities; in SH4, they're all kind of samey.)
Large, readable depth, speed, and course gauges.
Cut-scenes and newspaper headlines after your patrol if you've been killed, captured, promoted, or awarded a medal.
Working time compression.
Propeller sounds that seemed realistically loud - a destroyer passing overhead doesn't sound like a flea buzz, folks.
A sonar guy who isn't deaf.


In Aces:


Wolfpacks (duh!)
Radio traffic from BDU and other boats.
Air-dropped homing torpedoes from Allied aircraft, and Foxer torpedo decoys.
Updates on the progress of the war.
Convoys that could be detected on hydrophones from up to 50 miles away.


In SH1:


Ships that maneuvered realistically to evade steam torpedoes, not accelerating to 20 knots in 5 seconds and double-backing into the torpedo they were trying to avoid.
AI submarines with torpedoes.
SD and SJ radar that worked as described, were easily readable, and had usable range readouts.
An idiot-proof interface with nice 2D panels, rather than clicking through menus in SH3 or deciphering religious symbols in SH4.
A single TDC panel, without an "attack map" behind it.
The ability to jettison debris.
Ability to start a career any month between December 1941 and August 1945
A versatile periscope interface that could show maneuvering gauges or TDC elements.
An ID manual with different warship types sorted by their type (BB, CA, DD, etc.)



in sh1 a flooding in the electric motor room cause damage to the motors after some time, as in real life with electric systems

In sh 1 Fight against Ia boats that dive and fire torpedos, i found some of them at night in the radar thinking that was a sanpan until it dives ! the most exciting experience that i had ever in a subsim, the hunt of another submarine ( i had to follow and plot an intercept ) course because it dives sometimes as in real life did japanese subs.

SH1 Possibility to abandon ship

in Aces of the deep, Realistic bilge gauge, stay under in silent running with the pumps stopped makes that water raises until you switch on the pumps again. ( more noise) unless you use compressed air.

Aces of the deep, fog in calm seas and no rain

[Subnuts]

I've just updated the list, including recommendations from you guys and a few other things I've thought of overnight.

Man. How freaking depressing. The quick mission generators from Aces and SH1 were both awesome - you could set the weather, escort size, the possibility of air cover, enemy skill, the time of day...but BAM! It suddenly disappeared in SH3. :nope:

[TwistedFemur]

SH1:

Thermoclines were randomized, you never knew if there was one, and at what depth, until you made a test dive. They also changed depth over time/distance.

Raising the periscope on the surface gave you greater visual range.

Ran beautifully on Linux via Dosbox (and Winders too, I guess)

Now Flight Simulator, They know how to upgrade their sim. I've had most every version from Flight simulator II (for the Commie 64) to Microsoft's FS9, and in every new release, they've always just added new features, and never removed old ones.


And now FS is gone too

[IanC]

I once had a dream... the former Dynamix design team reunited and created; Aces Of The Deep II.
Mike Jones you reading this?

[bishop]

http://mngband.com/files/DSCF05521.jpg

Big boxes with lots of stuff inside. A real sense of value for the money spent...

[misfitdreamer]

i think this is an important thread indeed.

the first sub game i played was silent hunter II. i guess the general consensus is SHII was terrible. but i don't know - at least it still had alot of features from SHI.

with everything going on in SH3, perhaps we can take it on for ourselves to make SH3 as close to SH1 and aces of the deep. this is why it is so important to get an SDK

we could also make sh5 our sh1 with mods too

[codmander]

nice to see some old school skippers here .:yeah: yea silent hunter series is just like everything else ...just try and buy a gallon of ice cream or even bleach..hey lets give em 1/5 less and we can make an extra .05 of a penny per unit,,,,,,,,, effin greedy bastards:shifty:

[Uber Gruber]

Yep...its all graphics for the console generation now-a-days. Why ? Cos that's how software company directors interpret consumer buying patterns. Sad isn't it....made only worse by their rather amature interpretation. I've sat in many meetings where some "Bachelor of Anything" excitedly stands up and presents what can only be descibed as an horrendous understanding of the beautiful field of mathematical statistics.

One only has to profile a company to see that the bulk of employees occupy the somewhat oxymoronly named position of "manager"....so many managers, so little innovation.

There are people that want things done, and people who do things. In between there is just chaff. :zzz:

[Apos]

Good old days, when PC games were major game product and most of the developers were thinking about realism not about fun and arcade only.

The sadest thing is the developers now make game mostly for console your users and PC game is console port only. Games are in this time simply, not complicated, easy to learn (not it is not even necessery), just fun. But its all about money. Its better from them to sell 1mln arcade game for 12 yo console users then real sim for 10k PC gamers.

Totally agree with you, Uber Gruber (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=214941)

[bishop]

Good old days, when PC games were major game product and most of the developers were thinking about realism not about fun and arcade only .

Actually, developers were thinking about fun, but what they aimed for was the right balance of realism and fun so the game would appeal to a wider crowd. There are lots of unrealistic or 'gamey' elements of SH1 (crowded sea with tons of contacts, seeing the Yamato over and over again on the same patrol, the infamous red triangle, etc). But it was combined with enough realistic detail that the end result was a well balanced game that appealed to simulation fans as well as the more casual player, and maybe even helped turn some casual players into sim fans...

[Tarnsman]

I never understood why they cant lay cool graphics on top of the hardcore simulation?

Ive been onboard since 688! and it had a little 3d window of your command room. I would dream that in the future we could have crew and walk through the boat etc. but I never dreamt of sacrificing the underlying sim for that.

[j_o_nn_y]

I bet the devs are looking at this list and wondering why they didn't add any of these features to SH5. Probably too late now.

[johan_d]

Its always too late now.. thats all Dev's say, but the next version...

[goldorak]

I've just updated the list, including recommendations from you guys and a few other things I've thought of overnight.

Man. How freaking depressing. The quick mission generators from Aces and SH1 were both awesome - you could set the weather, escort size, the possibility of air cover, enemy skill, the time of day...but BAM! It suddenly disappeared in SH3. :nope:


The quick mission generator was lost, but a dynamic campaign was gained.
I still remember how people were up in arms telling, shouting like they wouldn't buy SH 3 if it had scripted missions or a mission editor.
They wanted a dynamic campaign. Complete randomness. They got it, Ubisoft pushed back SH 3 to include what many of the hardcore group wanted.
Really good games, good simulations can be developed without having a dynamic campaign. In most cases a mission generator like that in SH I, or like that found in Wings over Vietnam is pretty good.
DW was "ostricized" by many in this community because god help us it didn't have a dynamic campaign. All the while ignoring the fact that the game had an extremely powerfull mission editor.
Damned if you do damned if you don't.
This is what game developers must be thinking.

[razark]

I never understood why they cant lay cool graphics on top of the hardcore simulation?

Because that wouldn't sell to today's FPS players. I've had friends that have seen me playing subsims. They don't seem to understand that I'm actually involved in the game, without constantly doing something in it. Usually, I have the laptop next to the desktop, surfing the web, or watching a movie, and waiting for the next contact to appear. Sometimes I'll go on a patrol, turn up the volume and go clean up the kids' toys. Hours sometimes pass between one explosion and the next.

It's not the style of play that sells well these days. It seems like now, it's constant action, flashy graphics, go from one explosion to the next as soon as possible.

It's not a matter of it being possible to put great graphics on hardcore sim, it's a matter of being unable to make enough profit off of a hardcore sim to justify the investment.

[mookiemookie]

It's not a matter of it being possible to put great graphics on hardcore sim, it's a matter of being unable to make enough profit off of a hardcore sim to justify the investment.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. There is no technological reason why hardcore features can't be added - it's just that the return on investment on them makes them not worth it from a business standpoint. How many extra units will you sell if you include an intricate manual navigation system vs how many extra units will you sell if you include "ships that done blow up real good!"

[Subnuts]

The quick mission generator was lost, but a dynamic campaign was gained.


SH1 and Aces had a random campaign in the vein of SH3 and SH4. None of them are truly "dynamic" (like Falcon 4) in that sinking aircraft carriers or large tankers doesn't alter the outcome of the war one bit.

[Uber Gruber]

I think its more about the ammount of profit rather than suitable return on investment. Mind you, they need to make a fortune on each game now-a-days, mainly to pay the salaries of all the chaff they've accumulated.

I have a theory that if a game is good, and I mean GOOD, then it will sell itself over time. But such an idea would be too scary for a business that has sold itself on quarterly profit forcasts. Their thinking is just far too short range. They have become a profit factory rather than a games company. :nope:

Anyone remember Elite ? The original version ?

[goldorak]

SH1 and Aces had a random campaign in the vein of SH3 and SH4. None of them are truly "dynamic" (like Falcon 4) in that sinking aircraft carriers or large tankers doesn't alter the outcome of the war one bit.

Since the SH series is about recreating the historical experience of being a sub driver during WW2, it is pretty clear that whatever actions you take cannot influence the outcome of the war. Otherwise we would be playing a fictional scenario and this is what most players don't want.

Falcon 4 didin't have only a dynamic campaign, it simulated an entire war theater on air, land and sea. And it could do it precisely because there were no constraints as to the outcome of the conflict. So your actions actually had effects on the ongoing campaign.

The SH series never had this kind of freedom. So what we get for all pratical purposes is a dynamic campaign that is nothing more than a glorified random mission generator. So options that in SH I had to be set explicitely (such as time of mission, weather conditions etc...) are now in SH 3 created dynamically by the game engine without user intervention. You still get to sail on rough seas, or by clear weather. But like real life sub captains you get no say as to how the weather will be during your mission. Is this a step backwards ? In terms of realism no.
In terms of feature creep yes. But feature creep is the bane of software, so Ubisoft has done well by not throwing everything and the kitchen sink inside SH 3 and/or SH 4.

[floundericiousWA]

Since the SH series is about recreating the historical experience of being a sub driver during WW2, it is pretty clear that whatever actions you take cannot influence the outcome of the war. Otherwise we would be playing a fictional scenario and this is what most players don't want.

Well...we ARE playing a fictional scenario in SH3/SH4, no?

Actually I want the chance to vicariously live the experience of a WWII submarine captain/kaleun with many of the strategic evolutions taking place while I play...and the chance, just the slightest chance, that my success or failure will make a difference in the trajectory of the war in my chosen theater.

If I sink the three or four British CVs in and around the NorthEast Atlantic within six months, does that impact the battle for Malta?

If I manage to sink 15 or 20 of the really big T3 tankers in 1940, does that cause a difference in the battle of britain?

If I sink a significant number of destroyers in convoy attacks, does that weaken escorts in the atlantic convoy system?

If I sink several passenger transports during 1942/43, does that impact the planning/execution of Overlord?

wash, rinse, repeat for the pacific theater with the fleet boats!

[Kapitanleutnant]

Features in SH1 and Aces That Have Since "Disappeared"




The ability to play without an internent connection.


Welcome to ~The World of Tomorrow~

[goldorak]

Well...we ARE playing a fictional scenario in SH3/SH4, no?

Actually I want the chance to vicariously live the experience of a WWII submarine captain/kaleun with many of the strategic evolutions taking place while I play...and the chance, just the slightest chance, that my success or failure will make a difference in the trajectory of the war in my chosen theater.

If I sink the three or four British CVs in and around the NorthEast Atlantic within six months, does that impact the battle for Malta?

If I manage to sink 15 or 20 of the really big T3 tankers in 1940, does that cause a difference in the battle of britain?

If I sink a significant number of destroyers in convoy attacks, does that weaken escorts in the atlantic convoy system?

If I sink several passenger transports during 1942/43, does that impact the planning/execution of Overlord?

wash, rinse, repeat for the pacific theater with the fleet boats!

No you're not playing a fictional scenario.
And the reason is that whatever you do, and no matter how many ships you sink the strategic conditions WILL NOT CHANGE.
The course of the war is set in stone, from the moment you sail out in 1939 until 1945.
The missions are generated on historically correct data and there is nothing you can do about it.
Thats why as good as it is, the dynamic campaign in SH 3 is just a very very impressive random mission generator.

[floundericiousWA]

No you're not playing a fictional scenario.
And the reason is that whatever you do, and no matter how many ships you sink the strategic conditions WILL NOT CHANGE.
The course of the war is set in stone, from the moment you sail out in 1939 until 1945.
The missions are generated on historically correct data and there is nothing you can do about it.
Thats why as good as it is, the dynamic campaign in SH 3 is just a very very impressive random mission generator.


Bear with me, I was picking on you before regarding the use of the term "fictional."

The STRATEGIC course of the war is fixed in SH3.

The experience of the player, however, is not based on some historical table of which sub was sent on what mission on what date. It is fictitious and approximates reality by sending you "where BdU would have sent a sub from your flotilla at the time you go on patrol." It's "like history."

Once I'm on patrol in U-xxxx (pick your number), it's a sandbox. I can simulate going anywhere that the sub model can "physically" navigate.

[Platapus]

[QUOTE=Subnuts;1246196]

Chlorine gas from flooding reaching the batteries.

Just a nit to pick until it bleeds.

Chlorine gas would come FROM the batteries, not reaching to the batteries.

[razark]

Chlorine gas from flooding reaching the batteries.

Just a nit to pick until it bleeds.

Chlorine gas would come FROM the batteries, not reaching to the batteries.

Perhaps bad wording on my part. The point being that saltwater floods the boat, and when the water reaches the batteries, they generate chlorine, making it vital that you surface.

[Task Force]

I liked SH1... got it in a combo box with Flanker 2.1 years ago... just found it... just to get it to run...:hmmm:
Can you get sh1 to work in w 7 64 bit...

[razark]

I liked SH1... got it in a combo box with Flanker 2.1 years ago... just found it... just to get it to run...:hmmm:

That's how I got mine, as well. I've tried it in DOSBox on my XP computer, but it keeps crashing. I know I've run it before.

[goldorak]

That's how I got mine, as well. I've tried it in DOSBox on my XP computer, but it keeps crashing. I know I've run it before.

Uhm that shouldn't happen.
SH I runs great on dos box 0.72. I don't know about the new version though.

[razark]

Uhm that shouldn't happen.
SH I runs great on dos box 0.72. I don't know about the new version though.

Yup, version 0.72. Like I said, I had it running before. I'll perhaps try a reinstall soon and see if that goes.

[Chef]

Sad, isn't it?
Makes me want to get a bottle of whiskey and a shotgun.:cry:

It seems that in today's world, gameplay is inversely proportional to graphics eye candy.

I had AoD and SH1 with all of the patrol disks once upon a time. *sniffle*

[Ducimus]

It seems that in today's world, gameplay is inversely proportional to graphics eye candy.



In todays world, graphical eyecandy IS the gameplay.

edit:

speaking of which, If i remember correctly, neither AOD, nor SH1 had an external camera like we do in SH3, and SH4.

[[MIA]Prophet]

No you're not playing a fictional scenario.
And the reason is that whatever you do, and no matter how many ships you sink the strategic conditions WILL NOT CHANGE.
The course of the war is set in stone, from the moment you sail out in 1939 until 1945.
The missions are generated on historically correct data and there is nothing you can do about it.
Thats why as good as it is, the dynamic campaign in SH 3 is just a very very impressive random mission generator.

This is entirely something I'm feeling that people are missing from the entirely of the situation they're placed in with these games.

The only way to have a truly dynamic campaign where your ideas of shifting the balance of power to an Axis/quicker Allied victory is to create an entirely different war, perhaps set on a different planet, yet with remarkably similar weaponry.

The complaints lodge are not without some validity to them, but my time with going from SH3 to SH4 brought about a shift in the way I think about games, and how I enjoy them. We, as game playing individuals, are entirely at the discretion of our supposed masters, and will only be that way so long as we continue to allow them to be. I find while, with every sequel, and every new game coming out, the availability of the internet, and the dedication of players has created sites like this, and with it the insurmountable complaints of players and their narrow minded responses.

Simply put: the magnitude of the undertaking coming along with games today is spectacularly overlooked. Modeling for video games; creating and implementing is something that is neither to be overlooked, nor taken for granted. Remember, for every individual piece that has to be introduced to the game, it has to be created by hand from an individual, then passed along to another individual to digitally render the image, then add a number of layers, and the list goes on and on.

To create something that would be pixelated, or otherwise sub-par, in today's environment, is a death sentence for both the IP, and the company itself. While it would be nice to see all these sorts of things, placed into a game, with the option of every single one being added and removed at the whim of the player, we have to understand that as not the 10k said, but the most likely 500 or less players; the small margin hardcore enthusiast hold is something that can be easily overlooked, and without major repercussions.

To summarize; We must understand, and have the ability to understand, why decisions to remove, or leave out, simplistic and often minor additions to the game, are simply for the better.

And to satiate my natural urge to be a jerk: If you don't like it, mod it.\

Edit: tl;dr

[difool2]

Plus I remember in the old SH1, I was also credited for the ships I damaged, but did not sink.

Not in campaign-I once got reprimanded after returning to port after I emptied my entire clip of torps at a Yamato (and got tons of duds & preemies, but some hits).

I would have sworn that we get chlorine gas in SH3/4-say it ain't so Joe!

Right now I have a convoy set up (SH4) south of Korea in about 300 feet of water. I know I stand an excellent chance of getting away afterwards if I can get below the omnipresent thermocline before the escorts get too close. It was always a gamble if the essobee was there or not in SH1...

[JScones]

I once had a dream... the former Dynamix design team reunited and created; Aces Of The Deep II.
I was actually fantasising about the same thing yesterday after I saw the SH5 "authentic" campaign map.

[codmander]

bump-a rama this is a great post sub nuts hope ubi reads lets not forget sh2/dc2 actully got to control destroyers ,,,,,,,,,,,gone

[Rosencrantz]

Good thread indeed!


I have being thinking often, why have we lost so many good things in the progress, and why it always seems to be graphic part of the game what interests company/devs most. Ok, I admit, introducing the crew was something, but still...


Why have we lost so many technical things done already?


Greetings,
-RC-

[Sailor Steve]

I want Aces back with modern graphics...THAT IS ALL!!!!:damn:
People said as much when SH3 was under development. And I agree, but I have grown to like the crew management, especially in SH4. I also of course want modern sound.

To add to the list, though:

Aces: Bottoming the boat would actually make you harder to detect. On the downside you could get stuck in the mud and not be able to get unstuck, so you and your crew died.

Aces also had the most realistic damage-control screen ever - a blueprint of the boat, with damaged circled, and clicking on the circles took you to a simple report by the Chief telling you what, where and when.

SH1: The tear-off calendar with lunar phases, moon and sun rise and set times, and the weather.

SH1 also had super-thick fog in dead calm weather, as described already for Aces, and it was wonderful.

[janh]

Someone still know Silent Service on C64? Or Silent Service II on PC? Oh man, good old times.

Aces of the Deep definitely remains my all time favorite sub sim. Still have it, and after the new Ubisoft DRM blunder it maybe time to pull it out again. ;-)
Sure, graphics were awesome, but it had all to make an historically sufficiently accurate subsim. A good simulation.
If someone could polish up the graphics to 1024x768, doesn't even need fancy textures and light effects, but just be a good physics and AI simulation. I'd never leave it again.

[Ducimus]

Sh1 with Sh4 graphics would be the end all be all submarine simulation in my opinion. Nothing would ever top that i don't think. That would be a sub sim i could easily play off and on for the next decade.

I miss SSI.

[Task Force]

Someone still know Silent Service on C64? Or Silent Service II on PC? Oh man, good old times.

Aces of the Deep definitely remains my all time favorite sub sim. Still have it, and after the new Ubisoft DRM blunder it maybe time to pull it out again. ;-)
Sure, graphics were awesome, but it had all to make an historically sufficiently accurate subsim. A good simulation.
If someone could polish up the graphics to 1024x768, doesn't even need fancy textures and light effects, but just be a good physics and AI simulation. I'd never leave it again.

Yea, lol, I remember silent service on the super nintendo. lol... :yep:

[Subnuts]

Shamelessly bumping this thread to mention a couple things from SH2 that have also disappeared.



Ability to run electric motors on the surface, or run one diesel and completely shut off the other if it's been damaged.
A map showing the location of each ship you've sunk during the campaign.
Map screen showing depth under keel without having to use the echo-locator (suicidal IRL if destroyers were about).


On second thought, SH2 didn't bring a whole lot to the table. :damn:

[IanC]

Slower speeds in heavy seas, like in SH1. I remember hating the bad weather in SH1 because I was barely making any headway. So I would dive. A very 'Das Boot moment' actualy. :yep:

[CaptainHaplo]

Well, to defend the devs, development of any program, be it a game or app, follows a strict guideline. They don't have alot of freedom to go "hey lets put this in" once a project scope is defined. Small things may get in, but major changes don't happen. Project leaders give them a firm timeline to accomplish certain "milestones" - and they are hard pressed to meet those most of the time.

Its also important to realize that the development team is only one voice in the overall planning of a project. Often, its the marketing types that define a project, and the team simply has a goal and plan to work toward, without the ability to affect major deviations.

[utops]

This whole situation is not according only to subsims,but sim genre in general,
for me Red Baron is still very playable, so as Knights of The Sky by Microprose just because of details, newspapers with whats new on the front, randomness and nothig really was the same from mission to mission.
My Amiga, floppys B-17 FF,KoTS,RedBaron,Silent Service and I 18pm to 4 am
sweet times of the 90s.

[IanC]

My Amiga, floppys B-17 FF,KoTS,RedBaron,Silent Service and I 18pm to 4 am
sweet times of the 90s.

:rock: Ahh yes, subsiming and wee small hours of the morning. Those two things just go together for some reason.

[Sailor Steve]

Slower speeds in heavy seas, like in SH1. I remember hating the bad weather in SH1 because I was barely making any headway. So I would dive. A very 'Das Boot moment' actualy. :yep:
:rotfl2:

I didn't know about that for a long time; then one day I was wondering why I was going so slow, and it finally dawned on me.:damn:

On the other hand, the weather didn't really look very heavy while it was happening.

[IanC]

:rotfl2:

I didn't know about that for a long time; then one day I was wondering why I was going so slow, and it finally dawned on me.:damn:

On the other hand, the weather didn't really look very heavy while it was happening.

That's because the waves looked horrible in SH1 :lol:. Aces had a much better rendition if I remember correctly.

[Rosencrantz]

Wasn't there zig-zagging convoys and Task Groups in SH1?
I can clearly recall at least one convoy making zigs before I launched, and I can't believe I was somehow detected at the time. I was still learning both TDC and manual targeting and even if it asked alot of work from me, I was still able to maneuver in and shoot. And then there was once a Task Group of one or two heavy units + couple of light cruisers making 20+ knt, which I still could overrun (on the surface, of course) because of zigs. However, can't remember how the shooting went. Definitely still one of the most exiting moments.


-RC-

[swampa]

In Aces of the Deep, I am sure that there was a voice command option. Use a mic to give the order to dive & what depth , surface, turn port & starboard etc. I may also be very wrong

[razark]

Wasn't there zig-zagging convoys and Task Groups in SH1?


Pretty sure there were. I seem to recall that feeling I got, reliving moments from books I had read. Perfectly set up on a convoy, just about coming into range, and seeing them zig away. I remember the one time I had the joy of having a task force, including an aircraft carrier, that was out of reach zag right into a perfect set up for me.

Yep, haven't seen that in a while.

[Robsoie]

That's because the waves looked horrible in SH1 :lol:. Aces had a much better rendition if I remember correctly.
Aces of the deep (the original dos version, not the Command Aces of the deep that was a window version) had the superb waves being dependant on your cpu cycles.
Running it in DOSBox in which you can modify the cpu cycles on the fly can then have constant big waves if you go too high.
Command Aces of the deep despite having its graphic resolution increased in comparison to the dos version featured uglier water if i remember well.

[finchOU]

I liked the Random breakdowns of AOTD. keeps you on your toes and you cant rely 100% that your stuff actually works...like how it was. unpredictable escort behavior...modded pretty good in SH3...but it could take hours for you to lose an Escort....not the 30min from last contact stuff.

[Powerthighs]

This whole situation is not according only to subsims,but sim genre in general,
for me Red Baron is still very playable, so as Knights of The Sky by Microprose just because of details, newspapers with whats new on the front, randomness and nothig really was the same from mission to mission.
My Amiga, floppys B-17 FF,KoTS,RedBaron,Silent Service and I 18pm to 4 am
sweet times of the 90s.


Utops, I don't know if you've heard of it but you should check out Over Flanders Fields. It's the closet thing I've found to that old-school style that exists today.

There is one primary point to make: Giant corporations like Ubi make decisions based on perceived business value, market research, profit-loss margins, etc. With the massive cost of developing games these days due to graphical complexity, any dev team that works under a corporate umbrella will never produce the type of games you guys are looking for. It doesn't make sense from a bean counter's perspective. Believe me, I work at just such a company.

Only small independent developers or studios can make decisions with artistic merit as the primary factor. For example, see the excellent mods made by the modders here, which are labors of love.

Everything else is just a business.

[don1reed]

Scanning the surface with the TBT in SH1...nada. Then raising the scope to have a "Look See" on the other side of the horizon...Shazam! There's the convoy!

[mobucks]

You guys feel about the same as i felt when Fallout 3 was coming out. Fallout 1/2 were great RPGs, definately my favourite RPGs ever, and fallout 3 was all show and no go. It was a fraking FPS! Spent a lot of time venting my frustration on Bethesdas boards, got banned a few times, tralala. ect. ect.

More and more games are like this, why it is starting to happen in PC simulations, makes little sense to me, they are mostly niche markets, i can only think it has to do with every publisher (not developer) wanting to make the next "Halo" or in today's case, Modern Warfare.

Also the raising of graphical standards costs developers a lot of money so at the end of the day you really can't blame them (whoever them are) for wanting to make money.

Saving grace? Mods. Thats what i love about being a pc gamer. Hopefully SH5 is a platform modders can work with, thats up to the developer though so lets keep our fingers crossed.

[Sgtmonkeynads]

You guys feel about the same as I felt when Fallout 3 was coming out.

That was the first Fallout I played, and I thought it was pretty awesome! Then one of buddies said " NO, It really sucks, play this instead." He broke out his old copies of 1 and 2. I played them and came think the same way you do now.

This brings me to Sh5. If it is the only version new players have played, they wouldn't know that it is missing anything and wouldn't care. Old players will notice right away if something isn't right and go right back to playing Sh3. The only way the old players can get what they want out of the franchise is to educate :D new players on how bad the new game they just bought and thought was the coolest thing ever, actually sucks the moss off the bottom of SH3's hull. If we do this the game makers will have to bow to our wishes, because now the old guard is the majority.

[JScones]

In Aces of the Deep, I am sure that there was a voice command option. Use a mic to give the order to dive & what depth , surface, turn port & starboard etc. I may also be very wrong
I think that was the Win95 "Command: Aces Of The Deep" edition. I tried it, but couldn't get it working too well. :(

[swampa]

Win95 "Command: Aces Of The Deep" edition.I have found the game and it is. Don' think I could get it working either

[trenken]

Well things change, nothing any of us can do about it. You try to find something to like in each new game and thats all you can do.

The good thing about PC games is you still have a machine that can run those old games.

It's different with consoles. I still love old NES games, but Im not about to go hooking up my old NES. PCs are more convenient this way, SH1 will always be what it is, a great game thats still playable.

[KL-alfman]

Well things change, nothing any of us can do about it.



that's new to me

[Chef]

I have found the game and it is. Don' think I could get it working either
That's the version I had but I never tried to get the command part working. I was just watching part of Das Boat (also rereading the book) today and when they received the message about a convoy at grid AK22, I whipped out the old AoD patrol map to see where it was.

[misfitdreamer]

this topic is a good reference/starting point for SH5 modders. assuming these features are still left out.

[Ducimus]

this topic is a good reference/starting point for SH5 modders. assuming these features are still left out.

Modders can only change resource files. Or files the game calls upon when executing programmed routines, they can't change the programmed routines.

[tater]

Yeah, you cannot fix a fundamental problem like the inability for units (and groups) to properly zig-zag as virtually ALL ships do in war zones. Not having ZZing is like not having depth charges on escorts. It's that fundamental.

Real, complex ZZ patterns, too, not simplistic /\/\/\/\ stuff.

[Platapus]

The good thing about PC games is you still have a machine that can run those old games.



Not really. In theory there is a work through to play SH1 on Windows XP, but I have not have much luck with it.

[Rosencrantz]

Was radar in SH1 showing landmasses too, not just ships? Or do I remeber this wrong? :hmmm:


-RC-

[razark]

Not really. In theory there is a work through to play SH1 on Windows XP, but I have not have much luck with it.

Try DOSBox. It seems to work pretty well for me. I had a problem earlier, but I reinstalled SH, and it's working great.

Was radar in SH1 showing landmasses too, not just ships? Or do I remeber this wrong?

Yes, Landmasses showed up on the radar. It made tracking targets near islands more of a challenge.

[Spruence M]

I read two pages of posts here and had to stop.

Long live hopes and dreams and may we look to the future for a better sub sim.

I'm seeing another company producing the game. I hope.

[Kapitanleutnant]

Good to see this thread again.

[raymond6751]

I think the problem has been getting developers who played the earlier versions or even understood what they had to begin with.

You would think as the systems got more powerful, we'd get more game, not less game and more limitations.

In the attempt to use all the bells and whistles of the latest equipment and programming concepts, they have lost an opportunity to enhance what was already great.

[JU_88]

I think the problem has been getting developers who played the earlier versions or even understood what they had to begin with.

You would think as the systems got more powerful, we'd get more game, not less game and more limitations.

In the attempt to use all the bells and whistles of the latest equipment and programming concepts, they have lost an opportunity to enhance what was already great.



I think you have at least three problems

1) The market has changed, sims are not hot sellers anymore, the casual gamer wants insta-gatifiaction. sims require a level of commitment and patiance that most people are not willing to invest in a game.
For this reason sims dont get the budget and development time as tripple AAA title like COD or GTA.

2) Developers constantly try to 're-inevent the wheel' and strive for innovation, I guess this for a number reasons, one being not recieve flak for putting out an unoriginal product and second to keep things intresting for themselves.
At the same sime they have to be carful not to alienate their market, hen why most games fall in to a well established genre with just a few minor never seen before features.

3) The cost of games develepment it tenfold was it once was, all the technalogical advances mean that everthing is now way more complicated and time consuming to impelment.
Devs do what they can int he time they have, proffssionals or not - they are only human and sometimes make the wrong decisions.

Silent Hunter should have stuck to its orginal formula and gone down the DLC add-on road, that is the only way to get a complete sim these days.
Trouble is that many sub simmers tend to be a more mature audiance in there 30's and 40's, and Ive noticed that quite a few are (no offence) abit set in their ways, for instance I saw a thread where many of us here said they refuse to buy into things like DLC, and want everything on a disk.
Oh come on! Its 2010 for christ sakes... and its the begining of the end for optical media!
Roll with it grandpa :DL

[Sailor Steve]

Silent Hunter should have stuck to its orginal formula and gone down the DLC add-on road, that is the only way to get a complete sim these days.
But which one? SH1? SH2? Or does DLC include upgrades to newer graphics as well? If so, then I'm all for it.

Trouble is that many sub simmers tend to be a more mature audiance in there 30's and 40's, and Ive noticed that quite a few are (no offence) abit set in their ways, for instance I saw a thread where many of us here said they refuse to buy into things like DLC, and want everything on a disk.
Guilty as charged. I could make an argument for disks, but it would be arguing for my prejudices, as I download mods all the time and back up their storage. I've never put all the mods I have onto a disk. I wouldn't mind paying a little bit for upgrades and new stuff.

Oh come on! Its 2010 for christ sakes... and its the begining of the end for optical media!
Roll with it grandpa :DL
Language, please! My 60-year-old ears can only take so much!
:rotfl2:

Oh, and that more mature audience are in their 30s and 40s. :O:

[nikimcbee]

2) Developers constantly try to 're-inevent the wheel' and strive for innovation, I guess this for a number reasons, one being not recieve flak for putting out an unoriginal product and second to keep things intresting for themselves.
At the same sime they have to be carful not to alienate their market, hen why most games fall in to a well established genre with just a few minor never seen before features.


that sounds like the whole entertainment industry now!

[nikimcbee]

My favorite thing about SH1 was their patrol map system. You didn't need to spend an hour just getting to your patrol area. The map was huge too.

[stoneys-nutz]

Reading the first few posts just make you realise how crappy SH5 is.
The list is endless, enemy AI, looking at floor after every conversation, those stupid dialogue indicators, halos, sub on rails, and so on and on and on, i know there are mods for most of these things, but is it fair that you have to rely on mods to make a game playable.

Any hoo, is there a chance that some of the things missing from SH5 can be put in to a mega mod, after the patching has finished, if it ever is.

[Sailor Steve]

Any hoo, is there a chance that some of the things missing from SH5 can be put in to a mega mod, after the patching has finished, if it ever is.
Anything is theoretically possible. It really depends on how modable the game is. If it can be done, it probably will be.

[FIREWALL]

Both have simple graphics that doesn't require the amount of time needed to build and maintain like the graphics of today, therefore more time can be spent on adding new realistic/simulation features.



SAD. Developers have to reinvent the wheel everytime a new game is being developed and forgot much of what was learned from building previous games.

I had to only read to your post #10 to get to what I had planned to say. :salute: While graphics were what they were for the times, content was there.

As computers improved they went for the "GLITZ" and passed on the content. :nope:

It's a shame what could've been.

[stoneys-nutz]

Anything is theoretically possible. It really depends on how modable the game is. If it can be done, it probably will be.

I really do hope so, because the game deserves better.

I had to only read to your post #10 to get to what I had planned to say. :salute: While graphics were what they were for the times, content was there.

As computers improved they went for the "GLITZ" and passed on the content. :nope:

It's a shame what could've been.

Could not agree more, eye candy over content will be the death of PC games, a good point well made.

[the_tyrant]

I can almost imagine what happened:
marketing guy a: What games are popular these days? and why?
marketing guy b: Crysis is pretty popular, mainly because of the graphics.
marketing guy a: Good graphics, what else?
marketing guy b: Well Mass Effect sold well, the RPG elements proved to be popular towards nerds with no life.
marketing guy a: Ok, so we add RPG elements, what else?
marketing guy b: Battlestations pacific was well accepted by gamers, it replaced realism with action and explosions
marketing guy a: Good, so we will tell the developers of Silent Hunter 5 to make the graphics better, add RPG elements and action and explosions to what they already have



2 months later:

developers: OMG this game takes up 10 dvds, and another 500 GBs to install.
marketing people: remove everything, just keep the awesome graphics, RPG elements, action and explosions. :haha:

[Badger Finn]

AOTD - Grid map still got it. Its laminated. Reading the first post its unreal how much has dissapeared no wonder im always tweaking and hunting around for this or that mod combo these days...

Bizzare...

[Sailor Steve]

SH1 was my introduction to mods. Hawk's Silent Hunter Utilities:

SHReal: Corrects some flaws in the S-boats, mainly gets rid of the aft torpedo tube that only four of them had, none in combat.

PZ Pick: Lets you choose your patrol zone.

NewMaru: Semi-randomizes merchant tonnages.

NewGuage: Changes the guages to look more realistic.

NewBoat: Lets you choose the boat you want to run, including Narwhal and Argonaut.

ID Book: A new recognition manual.

Edit Rank: Lets you choose your rank (SH1 didn't have promotions).

Crew Experience: Lets you edit crew experience levels.

Eight mods, and not one of them was to fix bugs in the game. It only had one: If the destroyers had abandoned the search and were miles away, and you went to any time compression at all, they would come back and find you. That's it. Nothing else. Countless hours of fun and not one major complaint.

[don1reed]

Dang, Steve, you hit all the bases with that list.

Don't know if anyone already mentioned how the convoy survivors scattered to the four winds after the initial sub attack in SH1.

Sorry if I duplicated.

[JScones]

SH1 was my introduction to mods. Hawk's Silent Hunter Utilities:

SHReal: Corrects some flaws in the S-boats, mainly gets rid of the aft torpedo tube that only four of them had, none in combat.

PZ Pick: Lets you choose your patrol zone.

NewMaru: Semi-randomizes merchant tonnages.

NewGuage: Changes the guages to look more realistic.

NewBoat: Lets you choose the boat you want to run, including Narwhal and Argonaut.

ID Book: A new recognition manual.

Edit Rank: Lets you choose your rank (SH1 didn't have promotions).

Crew Experience: Lets you edit crew experience levels.

Eight mods, and not one of them was to fix bugs in the game. It only had one: If the destroyers had abandoned the search and were miles away, and you went to any time compression at all, they would come back and find you. That's it. Nothing else. Countless hours of fun and not one major complaint.
Ahhh, the days before Ubisoft...

:D

[Sailor Steve]

Don't know if anyone already mentioned how the convoy survivors scattered to the four winds after the initial sub attack in SH1.

Sorry if I duplicated.
I don't remember either, but it never hurts to repeat something good.

Which reminds me of another but I forgot, and really annoyed me:

I was chasing a merchant, shooting at him with my deck gun. All of a sudden my sub started turning. I ordered it back to course, but it kept turning. I looked at the map and found I was at the edge of my patrol zone. Since the game teleported you there you couldn't leave it except by ending the patrol, at which time you teleported back home again.

It only ever happened once, but the next time someone complains about having to drive all the way across the Pacific in SH4, I want them to remember 'the one that got away' because I couldn't go out of bounds.
:rotfl2:

[Buddahaid]

I don't remember either, but it never hurts to repeat something good.

Which reminds me of another but I forgot, and really annoyed me:

I was chasing a merchant, shooting at him with my deck gun. All of a sudden my sub started turning. I ordered it back to course, but it kept turning. I looked at the map and found I was at the edge of my patrol zone. Since the game teleported you there you couldn't leave it except by ending the patrol, at which time you teleported back home again.

It only ever happened once, but the next time someone complains about having to drive all the way across the Pacific in SH4, I want them to remember 'the one that got away' because I couldn't go out of bounds.
:rotfl2:

I've been there at least once.

[Rockin Robbins]

All hail the great Eyecandy God. We have sacrificed all to you and yea, we shall sacrifice more. For the next submarine simulation shall not have water.

[Sonarman]

Sh1 with Sh4 graphics would be the end all be all submarine simulation in my opinion. Nothing would ever top that i don't think. That would be a sub sim i could easily play off and on for the next decade.


Whilst the original Aces of the Deep team are scattered to the four winds, the original "Silent Hunter" team are actually still working together (http://ballyhoo-studios.com/team.html) perhaps we could ask them to fulfill your dream?

[Subnuts]

But, but...I never mentioned this in my OP, but SH5 is pretty!
http://www.subsim.com/2010_03/images_0310/review2.jpg

(I'm sorry if this screenshot isn't big enough.)

[IanC]

Yeah, and in a couple of years a kid will post "dude SH5 looks like soooo dated! It doesn't even use DX12..."

[Sailor Steve]

(I'm sorry if this screenshot isn't big enough.)
It also isn't an annoying slow-to-load .png! :O:

[PL_Andrev]

Perfect subsim game:

- simulation of submarine (SH series)
- simulation of destroyer (EnigmaRT, DC)
- simulation of other heavy warship (DC)
- control each weapon separately (SH, EnigmaRT, DC, BS series)
- control few units together (DC, BS series)
- additional control of planes/merchants (BS series)

- easy interface (SH3, DC)
- easy gun control (BS series)
- mission editor (SH seires)
- modability (SH series)
- amazing multiplayer battles as SUBvsDD or NAVYvsNAVY (DC, BS series)

And the winner is: SH2/DC
FAIL: poor graphic
FAIL: poor stability
FAIL: stupid AI
FAIL: no merchant/planes control
SPECIAL BONUS: possible playing as Yamato, Bismarck, Iowa, KGV

II place: SH4 ADV mode
FAIL: only one player for all naval units
FAIL: not stable UBI servers
FAIL: only 4 players per game
FAIL: no torpedo warfare against enemy submarines
FAIL: no epic battles between enemy fleets
SPECIAL BONUS: combat human vs human in classic SH game

III-place: BATTLESTATIONS series
FAIL: no simulation game
FAIL: no mission editor
FAIL: too many planes (naval game?)
FAIL: very hard game as submarine against humans
FAIL: human must control group of units, no selected ships with AI support
SPECIAL BONUS: direct control of planes and merchants (merchants only in modded missions)

[IanC]

Whilst the original Aces of the Deep team are scattered to the four winds, the original "Silent Hunter" team are actually still working together (http://ballyhoo-studios.com/team.html) perhaps we could ask them to fulfill your dream?

Somebody (in 'the biz' or with influence) should seriously contact these guys and propose it.

[Nisgeis]

Having a quick look at their site, it seems they were the ones responsible for SH2 as well, so past performance is no guarantee of future success.

[JScones]

Having a quick look at their site, it seems they were the ones responsible for SH2 as well, so past performance is no guarantee of future success.
Not quite. They started SH2, they didn't finish it. Development was taken over by Ultimation and they "completed" it - with "completed" being the debatable word (ie completed, or rewrote). You won't find Aeon in the game's credits (the credits exclusively list Ultimation as the developer and Ubisoft as the Publisher).

[AOTD_MadMax]

SH5 is an Grafikdemonstration, nothing else.

All important contents of an nice subsim are missed in the ocean of nowhere.
I stopped modding on sh5 cause this game should not be finished by the modders.
It has to be done by the devs and Ubi !

Why are the contents of the early subsimgames like Aces of the Deep and SH1 are missed in modern subsims like SH3, SH4 and SH5 ?

Its not an result of an poor Budget............................
Regards

Maddy

[Sonarman]

You won't find Aeon in the game's credits (the credits exclusively list Ultimation as the developer and Ubisoft as the Publisher).

The credits do list Kim Biscoe who was the lead artist at Aeon along with other intersting people in the business like Larry Bond (Harpoon) & Matt Wagner (DCS Black Shark). But you are right (sadly?) Ultimation pretty much junked the original Aeon project and started anew with the nasty "Janus" Panzer Commander/Destroyer Command engine.

Kim Biscoe has a long involvement with naval games on the PC right back to Microprose check out some of his projects here (http://kimbiscoe.com/computer-games.html)

It would be interesting to see what our talented modders could do today if DC & SH2 were open sourced, they must be nearing the end of their commercial lifespan even at budget by now.

[Subnuts]

Allow me to belabor my point and explain to the youngins out there what some reasons why the original Silent Hunter so brilliant.

http://i45.tinypic.com/2wfqsyx.gif
Bet you haven't seen anything like this in a while. Nothing remarkable, but wait - the variables in each of those 11 boxes could be changed. The quick mission creator was a powerful thing - one could change the date, crew and enemy experience, the weather, time of day, and enemy formation size, there were 10 boats to choose from, warship, ASW patrol, and submarine encounters, and lifeguard and photo recon missions. You didn't have to start a new campaign or muddle with the mission editor if you just wanted to sink a few ships.

http://i45.tinypic.com/344qxjt.gif
Just take a gander at those gauges. On a 17-inch monitor, they were probably twice as big as what you're currently seeing. They weren't half an inch wide and hiding in the corner, they were right in your face and you knew what they were reading.

http://i48.tinypic.com/fk3zi8.gif
The Torpedo Data Computer screen. No background attack map here - it's all business. Everything is laid out nicely and easy to understand. You don't need to drag dials around until they're at the right setting - just click and you're done. Even if you're running in Automatic, you still get an idiot-proof indication of target range, speed, bearing, and course, the accuracy of the current solution, how long the torpedo has to run, and you can set spread angle and torpedo depth without having to re-input new settings into each tube.

http://i48.tinypic.com/23lazw9.jpg
A long time ago, someone actually made a subsim with a radar station that didn't require a manual to decipher, and actually worked in a reasonably accurate manner. One can instantly get the range and bearing to a target, the search mode is obvious, and the functions of the air and surface search radars don't overlap. Even if you've never played the original Silent Hunter, you can probably tell me what everything in this screen shot indicates with reasonable accuracy.

http://i48.tinypic.com/152kly1.jpg
Many of the screens in Silent Hunter had multiple functionalities. Here we see the periscope showing position keeper data and the torpedo firing controls. Again, notice the readability of the gauges and the efficiency of the interface.

http://i48.tinypic.com/2dkbw9c.jpg
Here it is again, showing the maneuvering controls.


http://i45.tinypic.com/124gdqd.jpg
Finally, the same screen with the recognition manual open. Right away I know the target's displacement, maximum speed, what it looks like at different AOBs, what kind of weapons she'll open up on me if I get to close, and how deep I should set my torpedoes to run at. Also, I can click on the side tabs rather than clicking through each ship individually.

Feel free to gouge your eyeballs out now due the poor quality of the graphics.

[Schroeder]

The graphics were awesome for the time and I played SH1 for almost a decade (I shelfed SHII after a few months).
BTW the game worked out of the box. No patching required to enjoy it.:yep:

[Sonarman]

The ships of Silent Hunter were very much an evolution of those found in Silent Service II and the Great Naval Battles series as they were all the work of the same artist the aforementioned Kim Biscoe.

Makes you wonder what those guys could accomplish today given the much higher resolutions etc. That the original SH interface and ships still look pretty good even today and still warrant our praise is a testament to Kim's brilliant artistic talents. What a shame, given his amazing background that he is not using them for creating naval games any more...

[Takeda Shingen]

Oh, no doubt: Silent Hunter was and is magnificent. Whoever picks up the ball and develops submarine simulations in the future would do well to spend a few months playing it.

[sergei]

Allow me to belabor my point and explain to the youngins out there what some reasons why the original Silent Hunter so brilliant.

WOW!

Lot's of thought went into making sure that UI was crystal clear and easy to use.

Looking at this set of pictures provides an object lesson in game GUI design.

By all means modern game designers, make your GUIs look pretty.
But please DO NOT forget that its main purpose is not to look pretty, but to provide easily accessible functionality.

[Takeda Shingen]

I remember when everyone was sitting around waiting for SH2 (and waiting, and waiting, and waiting some more) thinking that we were going to get the original with upgraded graphics. Boy were we excited. Boy were we wrong. We got the upgraded graphics all right, but the rest couldn't hold a candle to Silent Hunter.

[Sonarman]

Yes, Ultimation's stumbling block in both SH2 & DC was poor AI also apparent in their previous release "Panzer Commander". It's a shame that they didn't take the Aeon Programming staff onboard along with the art dept as in truth they were much better at coding the AI than the Ultimation guys. Ultimately the final DC & SH2 releases show that had their hearts in the right place but just couldn't come through with the goods at the end of the day.

I also think SSI pushed the games out of the door much too soon. I remember at the time of launch an Ultimation dev posting at one point the game would be out in "about four months time" literally within hours his wrist was slapped by SSI, an angry post was made here by an SSI producer trashing the Ultimation posting and the games were on the shelves about two weeks later in a total state. SSI was at the time in transition from the Learning company/ Mattel to Ubisoft and no doubt wanted to show a nice profit graph to their new bosses at both our expense and ultimately (sadly) the reputation and future of Ultimation.

It would be nice in a perfect world if Ubisoft would release the SH2 + DC code as open source as a final thank you to the community for all of the fixes & features our modders have freely done for their products over the years and in recognition of the help & advice Neal has freely given them. No doubt the many, many mods created for the game have swung many potential purchasers to the series and doubtless extended the product lifecycle considerably, generating many extra sales for Ubisoft. These games must now be reaching end of life even at budget price and with some work on the code could yet acheive their full potential particularly as they are the only games in the series to feature fully operable destroyer vs sub multiplayer capability. A gesture such as this could go along way to repairing the rift between the publisher & the community caused by the implementation of the new DRM system & the unfinished state of SH5.

[Subnuts]

I'm going to shamelessly bump this thread just so the Eye Candie Queens can read it.

Gameplay > Graphics. :stare:

[goldorak]

I'm going to shamelessly bump this thread just so the Eye Candie Queens can read it.

Gameplay > Graphics. :stare:

You should have also posted images/scans from the SH I manual.
It was not very thick but boy did it deliver. The section dedicated to the geometry of torpedo firing was excellent. But these days the target demographic for these games is pre-school boys.
They wouldn't know a cos from a sin if it hit them hard on the forehead. :har:

[goldorak]

Not really. In theory there is a work through to play SH1 on Windows XP, but I have not have much luck with it.

Then you are doing something wrong.
SH I installs completely and plays beautifully on dos box. No problems at all. Same thing with Sierra Fast Attack, another dos-era game.
Its runs full speed, graphics and audio.

Really dosbox is a godsend when trying to revive old dos games.
And its infinitely simpler than trying to get a real dos pc up and running.

[DavyJonesFootlocker]

Yes in those days I actually hit ships with torps. It's a pity they couldn't have included those fine features.:wah:

[John Channing]

I'm going to shamelessly bump this thread just so the Eye Candie Queens can read it.

Gameplay > Graphics. :stare:

And you can be assured they speak highly of you, too.

Open-mindedness > Childishness :roll:

JCC

[Schwieger]

I can almost imagine what happened:
marketing guy a: What games are popular these days? and why?
marketing guy b: Crysis is pretty popular, mainly because of the graphics.
marketing guy a: Good graphics, what else?
marketing guy b: Well Mass Effect sold well, the RPG elements proved to be popular towards nerds with no life.
marketing guy a: Ok, so we add RPG elements, what else?
marketing guy b: Battlestations pacific was well accepted by gamers, it replaced realism with action and explosions
marketing guy a: Good, so we will tell the developers of Silent Hunter 5 to make the graphics better, add RPG elements and action and explosions to what they already have



2 months later:

developers: OMG this game takes up 10 dvds, and another 500 GBs to install.
marketing people: remove everything, just keep the awesome graphics, RPG elements, action and explosions. :haha:

What Ubisoft doesn't realize is that most people who play subsims don't care for all the "awesome graphics, RPG elements, action and explosions"

Quite honestly, with what they gave us with SH5, they should have made a shooter. I remember seeing SH5 in stores not too long ago. I picked it up, looked at it, set it down and walked the other way.

[robbo180265]

I'm going to shamelessly bump this thread just so the Eye Candie Queens can read it.

Gameplay > Graphics. :stare:

Yeah thanks mate - really useful thread necro:doh:

[longam]

<shrug>

[DavyJonesFootlocker]

What Ubisoft doesn't realize is that most people who play subsims don't care for all the "awesome graphics, RPG elements, action and explosions"Oh, really. Well for your information I'm not one of them. I like my subsims with immersibilty AND nice graphics.

[Sailor Steve]

Oh, really. Well for your information I'm not one of them. I like my subsims with immersibilty AND nice graphics.
As do many of us. The problem is that in this case they seem to think we only want one or the other. So they improve the graphics while throwing out all the things that made the earlier games great.

[goldorak]

As do many of us. The problem is that in this case they seem to think we only want one or the other. So they improve the graphics while throwing out all the things that made the earlier games great.

Isn't that the truth. :yep:
To be honest, much of what has gone wrong with the videogames industry is because of their own mistakes. Its always easy to blame the customer, blame the pirtates etc... But when it comes down to earth, nobody told those studios to start spending milions or in many cases tens of milions of $ on one game. And to bet everything on it. The consequence as you can see in the console market is that many studios just go under because a game although it sells hundreds of thousands of units doesn't compensate what was invested to develop it.
So you hear the same old mantra, customers don't buy, pirates free load, the second hand game market kills us etc, etc, etc... Same old lame excuses for their own failings.
Whats so difficult to start doing games in a self sustainable way ?

SH 3 had nailed 90% of what a WW2 sub sim was about. How inconceivable was it to improve upon that basis for SH4 and 5 ? That would have been the correct choice, instead no. They decided another way and didn't get the first signal, that SH 4 sold way less that SH 3. That should have launched a RED ALERT doom signal in Ubisoft but no lets get on with the program. Lets do SH 5 more anticonsumer than ever, put a half finished alfa on the shleves and blame everyone except us. How did that work in the end eh ?

I have no sympathy at all for the videogames industry. For 1 developer/studio that gets it, 99% don't. And we are expected to pay the price.
So excuse me but I'll go back to playing SH3, SHI, DW and Sierra Fast Attack.
No DRM crap, I'll play when and how I want. Games like these are immortal, just like reading a nice book. They never go out of fashion. And that is what the industry fears. Having to constantly improve. Instead we get less and less, higher prices and more anticonsumer crap. Enjoy your new world guys.

[janh]

Blaming the customer never works... because it wouldn't make any difference. Imagine a restaurant owner blaming the people outside for passing by after a brief glance at the menu...

Blaming the pirates has worked for a long while, and surely was in order. However, I think this did only reduce the unpayed downloads (but I wouldn't even bet that -- lack of quality surely does so much better for new games!), but did evidently not lead to "enough" new sales -- as predicted by so many. I wouldn't even be surprised if someone finds one day that it actually also cut into the sales (of people buying after "testing" the downloaded version).

But now trying to suppress the second hand market just proves that the companies are after any $$$ they can get, no matter how, and not ever whether they step on the toes of their customers (surely SHV, the OSP-DRM, or the new Ubi concept could be named as premiere examples). Well, free market, and shareholder companies... who would be surprised. They are not a niche studio like Maddox 1C, who, correct me if I am wrong, do this as much for earning a living, as also by dedication to their projects.

The basic problem presently is that big publisher like Ubi want to publish (and earn) more frequently with a title. But you can guess that a game like SHIII-V has reached a complexity that just for the beta testing would require 6 months, if the companies had the goal to really release as bug-free as possible (and not scare of loads of customers for years by the bugged initial release and obviously lack of trying to deliver real quality for the $). I don't think it is realistic with such simulations, or strategy/tactic games that have evolved so far.

I find BIS is trying presently something interesting, which may work. ARMA and ARMA2, unlike OFP, are probably now becoming more of a niche game (though their also try to attract casual gamers by having a really wide range of in-game options to reduce complexity and niveau). And these simulations really are complex now. Just see much detail is in ARMA2, with a powerful modding language, tools, an internal precompiler, or its features including AI successfully using building walls and objects for cover while acting quite smart even in a dog-fight. However, even ARMA2 loses half its market value within 1-2 years.
BIS is recently offering two types of addons: (i) for about half the price of the original game, which then include core enhancements of the game engine by features desired by the community (for example the FLIR and backpack systems). (ii) addons with purely maps and units, which also could be supplied by modders, but are much cheaper. Both appears to "support" the value and price of the original, and could guarantee much longer term sales potential if the customer-ship is satisfied with the content. And this way, the large development costs pay off and maybe we will also see an ARMA3 with again substantial content and feature addition, not only visual polishing. No need to publish a complete new game every year, if you can upgrade the engine with the things your customers really care for until it truly reaches its limits.

[Barso]

I agree, I love arm2 and have supported Bohemia Interactive from the early days.
They are one of the main reasons why I stick with PC gaming.
Everyone knows that their games are buggy from release BUT they are fully supported with frequent patches, beta patches released to the public, official add ons and a modding community that's absolutely fantastic and on par with the subsim community.
All this from a small team, the best thing ubisoft could do is give up on the SH franchise at this point and let the better people take up the mantle.
I don't think SH5 is the last subsim we will see but I hope it's the last from ubisoft.
Maybe other smaller teams will do a better job but they're just scared to go up against the SH franchise.

[janh]

To be honest, I skipped ARMA1 because it did hardly have any new feature compared to OFP, or significant AI changes -- mostly a graphics polish that I was keen on.

But I bought ARMA2 just 4 weeks after release date, once I was sure it actually delivered something that was truly going beyond OFP. I it actually not so buggy. There were performance issues, which they finally solved, but per se I saw no real game breaking bug. Oh, I run it on an ASUS Gamer Notebook, 2GB and 2 Core2Duo 2.0GHz with an 8600M GT, so it is not surprising that this causes some performance issues, but it actually ran quite smoothly after the 2nd patch. Of course the graphics settings are at the lower quality end, but it is still very "cute" for a simulation.
For sure, the customer support with BIS games, their interaction and support of modders (even adding new modding commands in patches) is at the highest level. There is very few companies out there that show a similar commitment to their products and customer wishes/complaints.

[mikeydredd]

This thread brought back so many memories of "the good old days" of simulators, which in my opinion were the 90's.

Back then the target audience for pc games were by and large "us" - the simulator generation if you like. Primarily men in their late 20's to 40's, with enough disposable income to buy a pc for home use (my first pc cost me £1350 in 1992), well educated, well read, with an interest in world events and history. Pc games had, largely, to cater for "us".

That is no longer the case and while broadly, the simulator market has remained with "us", the video games market has moved on markedly, in effect leaving our little niche and "us" way behind in terms of market share.

It now has to cater for "them" - the mass market - teens to early 20's, wanting and demanding cheap thrills, easy accessability, simplistic interfaces, and EYE CANDY. And no manual, at all.

Which is what they and, unfortunately, we, have got.

In the video gaming world we are the dinosaurs gentlemen, and it seems that there is very little we can do to alter that.

Break out your Dosbox and support the modders, it's all that's left for "us".

Have a nice day!

Regards,

Dredd:arrgh!:

[Zoomer96]

I miss the bathythermograph! You could just look at it and tell if you were in a thermal or if there wasn't one. Sometimes the thermal wouldn't be that good and maybe the destroyer would locate you. The Quartermasters log indicated what ship you sank and the tonnage. Also all of the fleet boats had the Mod 3 or 4 conning tower. I like the graphics of SH4 and 5 like the sunsets and stuff like that but I would have been happy with the bow planes deploying during the dive or fleet boats with correct props and not uboat props. I liked SH1 cause it was the next step up from Silent Service II.

I don't remember having any trouble running it but back then. It didn't have any bugs that I remember but you had to have the top of the line 486 DX 66 mother board. 4 megabytes ram (cost $300 dollars) really made it shine! The radar worked right out of the box and it didn't take 20 minutes to get to your patrol area.......

[John Channing]

Sure it did.

The most famous one was that if you were being hunted by OpFor DD's, once you gave them the slip if you went into time compression they would immediately find you again, drive in a straight line to where you were and begin destroying you. There were others, but that's the one that used to drive me nuts.

That, and no stadimeter. In fact, other than radar, no way at all to estimate range.

JCC

[janh]

... And no manual, at all. ...


That's one thing I truly miss. I still have all of the thicker manuals of my past games, though many the 5 1/4" or 3.5" disks have long ended up in the trash. But some of the manuals have really nice history or technical background sections, identification booklets, and so much more. Those added a lot to the time and fun I had with games like Jane's Longbow, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe and all those ancient treasures. Sad that they didn't really built something new on the framework of the latter ones.