Doubts!? Will they release a new Silent Hunter?!

[Leandro]

A good day to all commanders this is my first post hope you like it.
With the advent of successful simulations of war will be possible to have another title based on silent hunter, perhaps an alternate history during the Cold War, with the passage of conventional submarines (diesel / electric) for nuclear submarines? Or perhaps something that go in the future, around 2015, using the new Virginia-class maritime patrol missions?! Unlike the period of the First World war and Second World war, in which the submarines that were used on a large scale, the Cold War was a period technological development and in modern times, despite the SSN and SSBN platforms are the most powerful ever built war, wars maritime play a more tactical compared the use of submarine warfare in the first half of the 20th century. It would be possible to have a great simulator with submarines today?!

[1480]

A good day to all commanders this is my first post hope you like it.
With the advent of successful simulations of war will be possible to have another title based on silent hunter, perhaps an alternate history during the Cold War, with the passage of conventional submarines (diesel / electric) for nuclear submarines? Or perhaps something that go in the future, around 2015, using the new Virginia-class maritime patrol missions?! Unlike the period of the First World war and Second World war, in which the submarines that were used on a large scale, the Cold War was a period technological development and in modern times, despite the SSN and SSBN platforms are the most powerful ever built war, wars maritime play a more tactical compared the use of submarine warfare in the first half of the 20th century. It would be possible to have a great simulator with submarines today?!

Welcome aboard sir!:salute: This has been debated on these forums since sh4 was released. Search the forums for that subject since you will find many posts about for and against the cold war era. Not even sure at this point that there will be a sh6.

[CCIP]

Any game is possible in theory, and would be fun if made well.

In practice, this will not happen for a while. There are a few strategy games and wargames being developed that feature modern subs (from Naval War: Arctic Circle to Command Ops), but it is not very likely you'll see sub sims as such any time in the next few years. Ubisoft is not likely to develop another Silent Hunter game soon, or perhaps ever - SHV was a critical and commercial flop, and they will not be looking to spend money on this franchise. The only developer with real experience and credibility in making modern sub sims, Sonalysts, is currently not working on anything for the consumer market, instead building training software for military clients.

The most likely source from where a new sub sim might unexpectedly appear is from Russian developers - there is a decent simulation market and community in that country, and lower development costs; but to date, noone has announced any plans to work on it.

I don't think sub sims are dead or anything, and the dedicated community here more than proves that, but you're not going to see commercial development any time soon. I can almost guarantee you that you will not see a new sub sim title until, say, 2018. And then it will probably be another WWII sim. I think the market will, eventually, support new development, once new technology comes around and some of the current problems in making money from games that are not Call of Duty are resolved. But the Silent Hunter series is probably dead - long live Silent Hunter!

[HW3]

IMHO Silent Hunter V killed the Silent Hunter series, just as gaming consoles are killing PC gaming. There are few if any gaming makers willing to invest the time and resources into making games for PC's, when they can make them much faster and cheaper for the gaming consoles.

[Jimbuna]

Have to agree with the two posts above :yep:

[Randomizer]

While I would agree that the Silent Hunter franchise is now dead, I think that it is premature to kill off PC gaming due to consoles and such.

Rather I believe that PC games will evolve into something somewhat different than what we have become used to. Sound and light spectaculars, stunning visuals and first-person role playing games will continue to drift into the console format, becoming more interactive and also simpler to accommodate a wider audience. On the other hand, niche games and military simulations will continue to be produced but by smaller publishers and even individuals. These games will feature greater simulation value but be graphically limited since the cost of fancy graphics requires a large investment and commiserate return.

In addition to small companies, groups will come together to produce simulations either as open source or closed source with potential user input applied to the finished product. Expect no more CD-ROM or DVD and follow on DLC at additional cost will become industry standard.

Look at the work being done on Command here:

http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=1101

Also Steam and Iron the new WW1 naval simulation by NWS (hardly a large company) here:

http://forums.navalwarfare.net/showthread.php?2328-INFORMATION-AND-DOWNLOADS-THREAD

One might also include Guns of August, essentially a one-man design by Frank Hunter and marketed by Matrix Games:

http://www.matrixgames.com/products/331/details/Guns.Of.August.1914.-.1918

I would suggest that these games are indicative of the future of PC wargaming and there is probably little chance of a graphically impressive submarine simulator resembling the SH series in style or scope anywhere down the pipe.

[Angelo Cire]

I don't know. The assertion that it is cheaper to develop for consoles is incorrect. The SDKs for consoles can cost thousands of dollars up-front, and even after that you'll be developing in C# for 360, or C++ or the like for PS3(which you also can use for pc games).
The reason more large companies are developing for consoles is the ensured-compatibility user-base they offer over pcs.

As far as seeing a SH-style subsim in the near future, well.... gaming companies often forget their failures and put their hopes in reboots. Not that I'd expect graphics-obsessed Ubisoft to understand what was wrong with SH4 and SH5, and right with SH3....

The key is showing independent subsim developers support, which in-turn larger companies see. One indie success can spark corporate interest in a genre. Just look at Minecraft.

I think that unfortunately, modding communities for old games look to companies like die-hard nostalgic fans, rather than a genre-oriented user-base to work with. When Fallout 3 was released, all the FO1&2 fans derided it as missing the point of the series, and instead of Bethesda going, "maybe these guys know what they're talking about", they said "these guys are just old stick-in-the-muds", and went on to make Fallout: New Vegas, which flopped for exactly the reasons that the fans had told Bethesda it would.

[SummerStorm]

I do not think SH is "dead" just on a hiatus.
SH5 seems to have been a bad attempt to reach new markets with the franchise. A failed bid, as management always fcuk's games but one that will make them realise the value of the core brand. And if there is a SH6 I think it will only be good. Both SH4 and 5 were failed attempts to develop on the successful core of 3, which really is a benchmark.

As for cold war etc sub sims, I feel no. As modern subs are dramatically different in agenda to the ww2 model.

[SummerStorm]

When Fallout 3 was released, all the FO1&2 fans derided it as missing the point of the series, and instead of Bethesda going, "maybe these guys know what they're talking about", they said "these guys are just old stick-in-the-muds", and went on to make Fallout: New Vegas, which flopped for exactly the reasons that the fans had told Bethesda it would.

Which is why I think a SH6 will happen and I think it will be a success.

[K-61]

If Ubi decides to take another run at a sub game, I hope they will get it right next time: Fully functioning and interactive wolf packs are a must. It is tiring being the only U-boat in the great wide Atlantic. A realistic aerial model is also a must. Being swarmed by whole squadrons of Sunderlands is completely ahistorical. Just get the basics right and then worry about the eye candy.

[Herr-Berbunch]

SH is not dead, it's just not having any more babies, but they are still having plastic surgery to keep up with the young pretenders.

Hell, if people are still playing dos games 20+ years later, just imagine what the great modders here will have done with SH by 2030.

[USS Drum]

How about a Japanese campaign?

[SummerStorm]

How about a Japanese campaign?

because it lacks the tension, romance and drama of the Atlantic wolves

[Jimbuna]

How about a Japanese campaign?

Simply go to SH4

[Fish In The Water]

A good day to all commanders this is my first post hope you like it.

Welcome aboard mate and thanks for kicking it off with an interesting topic! :sunny:

[CCIP]

Personally, I also think SH4 and 5 get unfair flak as being 'botched' and 'worse' than SH3 - they were not. People really need to go back and remember SH3 as it was when it first came out. It's just that SH3 came after a long drought and filled an empty niche. I think very few people these days remember what SH3 was actually like when it first came out, and tend to compare 4 and 5 to what it became (largely thanks to mods) rather than on their own merits. That's not to say 4 and 5 shouldn't have been more, but the rumors of their being worse than 3 are greatly exaggerated. But they came at a point when the target market was already saturated. SH4 tried to capture that market with another theater, wasn't a significant technical improvement over 3 (although still an improvement), but that market was so sold on SH3 that many were too loyal to the Atlantic theater to give the Pacific a fair try. IMHO as both a game and a platform for mods, SH4 is far better than SH3. It's only because of loyalty of the fanbase to its predecessor that it never took off. SH5 instead tried to expand the market to more casual players - again, not a terrible idea, and again many good concepts. Sadly money ran out before ambitions, and the design was never really finished, and support cut off early. But as released, I'd argue it was better than SH3. It was just that we came to expect a lot more thanks to SH3, which brought something incredibly fresh to the table that, for all its flaws, still turned out to be exactly what so many of us wanted for years.

Give it a few years for technology to get substantially ahead, and the thirst for a new subsim will come back.

[Madox58]

I think the base is solid through SH5.
They would just need to fix the things that need fixed and not add crap before that!

And if they don't want to do that because they don't want to sink any more $$ into it?

Allow a dedicated Group of Modders the Source Code!
At lest part of it anyway.
We could do so much and it would only put more Money in thier pockets.


OK. I woke up just now from a dream and realized how stupid that sounds to UBI.
:haha:
What? Get something for free? Where's the catch?
:DL

[Obltn Strand]

This forum has some 65 000 members. I use this as a guideline to represent the number of subsim gamers around the globe.

Privateer said SH5 is solid base. Now 65 000 want's a better subsim like SH5 + additional expansion pack which has all the cool stuff like AI wolfpacks and so on. If this expansion pack costs 30$, profit is 1 350 000$ - expenses. Let's assume this expansion doesn't work without SH5 so ubisoft makes even more profits selling the original product.

I don't know nothing about computer programming. My guestion is how much subsim we can get for 1,5 to 2 million dollars?

[Angelo Cire]

This forum has some 65 000 members. I use this as a guideline to represent the number of subsim gamers around the globe.

Privateer said SH5 is solid base. Now 65 000 want's a better subsim like SH5 + additional expansion pack which has all the cool stuff like AI wolfpacks and so on. If this expansion pack costs 30$, profit is 1 350 000$ - expenses. Let's assume this expansion doesn't work without SH5 so ubisoft makes even more profits selling the original product.

I don't know nothing about computer programming. My guestion is how much subsim we can get for 1,5 to 2 million dollars?

Unfortunately, companies the size of Ubisoft spend MUCH more than 2 million dollars developing games now, and expect returns in the high-tens to hundreds-of-millions. So called "AAA" games are mostly what Ubisoft focuses on making now, apart from their sport franchises.

The problem with subsims going forward is that any developing company won't want to treat it as a "sim", they'll want to do something "different" and "original" with the genre, like making your sub a home-base from which you conduct land incursions circa 2070..... or whatever they come up with, in order to turn a niche series into their next "AAA" action and/or FPS series.

Besides, "Silent Hunter" is already close enough to "Ghost Recon" or the like to make a gamer unfamiliar with the series think it an FPS just based on the name.

[Sailor Steve]

Good points. Subsim may have 65,000 members, but only a few hundred are actually active, and don't have a lot of influence on the gaming industry.

Here are some sales figures for the top-selling games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

And here are some sales figures for Silent Hunter.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1270494&postcount=3

Even the worst of the best-selling games topped one million units sold. Silent Hunter doesn't even rate 10% of that. Couple that with the idea that even if Ubisoft did make a new one there is no guarantee that it would even be as good as SH5, much less a lot better.

[Fish In The Water]

Even the worst of the best-selling games topped one million units sold. Silent Hunter doesn't even rate 10% of that.

'Tis enough to make me cry in my coffee. :cry:

I guess most people just don't get it, which probably makes us eccentric, special or just plain odd. Not that it matters what they think of us, but I suppose it's all the more reason to be civil so we don't end up talking to ourselves. :D

[Sailor Steve]

eccentric
That would be you.

special
Jimbuna.

just plain odd
Hi. My name is Steve. :D

[Fish In The Water]

Hi. My name is Steve. :D

Well if you're odd it's a good odd, so three cheers for individualism and standing out from the crowd! :Kaleun_Cheers:

[Leandro]

What would be a good idea for a new naval emulator?
More realistic graphics?
Better interaction with the command console?
More units of surface and underwater?
Bases with historical fidelity?
Missions based on historical facts?
Increased randomization of missions?
In most cases small details can bring perfection to a successful franchise.
What could be done would be an innovation in the creation and distribution system simulator. For example a simulator already figured into chapters, each chapter interacts perfectly with the earlier and later!?
The creative team could consentrar in important parts of content for better development of the action!
Imagine now the first part of the simulator set in the years that the war occurred, each period in the correct geographical area!
The first part would be based on the German attack on Poland to the United States entered the war.
Some time later it launched the second part with the collapse of France and direct attack on the North American coast.
The third part was the attack on the Caribbean and South Atlantic
The fourth part would be the missions in the Mediterranean and Far East.
And the fifth and last part would be the final part of the war with combat in the Baltic and in the far northern Atlantic, the Arctic.
Not forgetting that each unit that were supposed to lead would be included in the next chapter, since the D type II into type XXIII with a better search units being the most accurate possible, with well-defined missions to attack merchant convoys, the placement of naval mines.
All recorded on Blu-ray or a better media with high storage capacity, it would certainly be something with an unprecedented quality and immersion in a simulator.
Sometimes we have to complain about is the quality of the artificial intelligence in the simulator, but I think the solution is simple! Why not turn into an MMO?! This period that increasingly played online would be fantastic to have a naval emulator based on the second world war, could finally have a challenge to time, with teams playing in major maritime forces in wartime their respective units.
Silent Hunter himself, tried it with the second game of the franchise, which was called Destroyer Command, which could be purchased separately and so we could play with units of surface and subimarinas against each other online, I think the reason for not have vindicated the idea that perhaps was ahead in time.
A simulator MMO with a great graphic quality and the challenge for players to practice their abilities in a naval war!
Potential of naval submarine hunting missions, escort on a mission to protect the naval convoys, large surface vessels in battle of the titans! All this controlled by players, the technology exists, research material has plenty, perhaps what is lacking is good will and vision to do what needs to be done.
If large companies are out of ideas just take a look at it here in the forum! Here in subsim is a great laboratory of ideas is so enjoy!

[Madox58]

but I suppose it's all the more reason to be civil so we don't end up talking to ourselves. :D
I talk to myself all the time. I even answer myself!
(It's those voices in my head that speak a different language that bother me. And they won't get a freaking job!)

[CCIP]

Honestly, I think the best thing in a sub simulator that most of us would want is simply if it took all of the good features of SHIII, put them together with all the good features of Aces of the Deep, added cutting-edge graphics, a more 'living' submarine crew and interior, a more dynamic world and an AI that can "think" both strategically and tactically, we would all be very happy.

I honestly don't see the point of reinventing the wheel, especially since there still hasn't been a subsim that nailed the basic formula perfectly - some have come close, but none have really achieved it. Only with mods and workarounds do we get close.

So if someone makes a subsim in the future, all I wish for is a sim that doesn't miss any of the basics. Call me backwards, but I don't want a revolutionary subsim that changes how we play these games.

[Jimbuna]

Good points. Subsim may have 65,000 members, but only a few hundred are actually active, and don't have a lot of influence on the gaming industry.

Here are some sales figures for the top-selling games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

And here are some sales figures for Silent Hunter.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1270494&postcount=3

Even the worst of the best-selling games topped one million units sold. Silent Hunter doesn't even rate 10% of that. Couple that with the idea that even if Ubisoft did make a new one there is no guarantee that it would even be as good as SH5, much less a lot better.

Looked at the PC games list on your Wiki link Steve and I can honestly say I don't have any of those games....not sure if that is a good thing or not :hmmm:

[Obltn Strand]

Honestly, I think the best thing in a sub simulator that most of us would want is simply if it took all of the good features of SHIII, put them together with all the good features of Aces of the Deep, added cutting-edge graphics, a more 'living' submarine crew and interior, a more dynamic world and an AI that can "think" both strategically and tactically, we would all be very happy.
That pretty much does the trick.


So if someone makes a subsim in the future, all I wish for is a sim that doesn't miss any of the basics. Call me backwards, but I don't want a revolutionary subsim that changes how we play these games.
Subsims aren't very innovative games. Pretty much same deal every time. You hunt lone ships and convoys. Fire torpedoes and deck gun and dodge depth charges.
Ubisoft based SH5 on crew interaction and walk around submarine and disregarding all things mentioned by CCIP.

Now back into daydreaming.

Checked those sales figures and the most optimistic number is 200 000 potential buyers. Let's go with realistic 100 000.

Subsimmers is like any society albeit being special, eccentric or just plain odd. Power of society comes from it's members and in modern times it comes down to money. 50$ x 100 000= 5 000 000$. More difficult question is how to colllect this sum. I repeat and rephrase my original question: Can someone give me an estimation what would it cost to make a good subsim?

[Herr-Berbunch]

Looked at the PC games list on your Wiki link Steve and I can honestly say I don't have any of those games....not sure if that is a good thing or not :hmmm:

Me neither.

One thing I really, really hate is going on a website that sells games and selecting 'Simulation' only to find page upon page of that dross called The Sims before getting to anything remotely simulatory. :damn:

[Jimbuna]

Me neither.

One thing I really, really hate is going on a website that sells games and selecting 'Simulation' only to find page upon page of that dross called The Sims before getting to anything remotely simulatory. :damn:

I think my lad had the original or something of that nature.

[CCIP]

I repeat and rephrase my original question: Can someone give me an estimation what would it cost to make a good subsim?

That's not an easy question to answer because it really depends on the business model of the developer/publisher, and what conditions they are willing to work under. There is also the question of what "good subsim" is and what kind of skills are required for it. There is also the question of what platforms it's developed on, what licenses it might require (for example graphics engines, shaders, development and graphics software etc. cost money), etc. etc. Then there are marketing budgets and testing budgets. Those all can vary widely, depending on the business model adopted.

So the real questions to ask are: 1) What features do you want? What are your priorities? and 2) How are you planning to sell and make money from this?

It's no secret that a lot of what makes games expensive lately are extravagant art budgets (even if game artists themselves are often paid very poorly). All of those pretty graphics we're accustomed to from big-budget games cost a ton of money. They need very large teams to support. They also attract customers. SHIII would not have nearly been as successful had it not looked so good when it first came out. I strongly suspect that even for something like SH5, the art budget runs into 7 digits (i.e. over $1 million).

On the other hand, a couple of guys with no budget can develop a good subsim in the long term. It's not gonna look great and it's going to take them a while, but the actual budget will be very low. The main investment there is not money, but time and work. And as a result, the biggest problem is motivation. At the end of the day, thousands of man-hours of free work are difficult for a developer to justify. And it's very difficult to market a game that doesn't have pretty art.

So I think the problem is not budget at all. The problem is having a business model. Noone right now has a good business model for marketing a new submarine sim. Money isn't a problem in the first place anyway because a group of people can easily obtain business loans for even the most extravagant budget. But how do they make it back and not get burned?

That's the million-dollar question. Ubisoft nailed the answer with SHIII in 2005, but they haven't been able to repeat it since, because SHIII itself changed the market. Throwing money at it isn't really going to solve very much, and Ubi has learned that with SH4/5.

[CCIP]

Otherwise, maybe a simpler answer would be - something to match the current SH games? You'd probably need at least an equivalent of 12-15 people working full time for about 2 years. How much do you figure that would cost? You're probably looking at at least $1 million there. Now add in things these people will need to work - computers, software, office space. Now add licensing fees for technology. Now add a marketing budget. Now add publishing costs.

So the short answer is probably $2-3 million even with modest effort.

But like I said, unless there is a business model, the money is actually irrelevant. Development and funds should fall into place themselves as long as the whole project has a viable market and ways to reach that market. Simply paying someone to create a 'dream game' is inviting a business disaster (and possibly a poor actual game, too).

[Obltn Strand]

Otherwise, maybe a simpler answer would be - something to match the current SH games?
You said it your self.
Honestly, I think the best thing in a sub simulator that most of us would want is simply if it took all of the good features of SHIII, put them together with all the good features of Aces of the Deep, added cutting-edge graphics, a more 'living' submarine crew and interior, a more dynamic world and an AI that can "think" both strategically and tactically, we would all be very happy.

You'd probably need at least an equivalent of 12-15 people working full time for about 2 years. How much do you figure that would cost? You're probably looking at at least $1 million there. Now add in things these people will need to work - computers, software, office space. Now add licensing fees for technology. Now add a marketing budget. Now add publishing costs.

So the short answer is probably $2-3 million even with modest effort.

But like I said, unless there is a business model, the money is actually irrelevant. Development and funds should fall into place themselves as long as the whole project has a viable market and ways to reach that market. Simply paying someone to create a 'dream game' is inviting a business disaster (and possibly a poor actual game, too).

Whish I had funds to make it happen. But as you said "paying someone to create a to create a 'dream game' is inviting a business disaster." Computers aren't my business.

So 2-3 million $ hard cash could make a good submarine simulator. Let's say 20 000 loyalist will preorder one for 50$. That's 1 000 000$ starting fund for a game manufacturer.

[Randomizer]

So 2-3 million $ hard cash could make a good submarine simulator. Let's say 20 000 loyalist will preorder one for 50$. That's 1 000 000$ starting fund for a game manufacturer.
You would have an easier time getting the political Left and the political Right to unanimously agree on a vision of the future than you would to get 20,000 Sub Simmer's to agree on a vision of the ideal submarine simulation and back it with hard cash on spec.

Enjoy your fantasy; CCIP's analysis is probably quite accurate and there is no business case for another chapter of the Silent Hunter franchise for the foreseeable future.

[RICH12ACE]

why not have british subs of ww2 for SH6 :woot:

[Obltn Strand]

You would have an easier time getting the political Left and the political Right to unanimously agree on a vision of the future than you would to get 20,000 Sub Simmer's to agree on a vision of the ideal submarine simulation and back it with hard cash on spec.
No need for unanimously agreement. Just 50$ spent on pre order. I and many others have lost more to gambling.

Enjoy your fantasy; CCIP's analysis is probably quite accurate and there is no business case for another chapter of the Silent Hunter franchise for the foreseeable future.
My intententions were not to pressure another chapter in the silent hunter franchise.

CCIP's analysis proves a good subsim can be made with profit. Only problem is to make game developer to understand this. You call it fantasy I call it innovation. With current attitude next subsim will come out in ten years and has 1 in 2 chance to be crappy.

[Randomizer]

No need for unanimously agreement. Just 50$ spent on pre order. I and many others have lost more to gambling.

My intententions were not to pressure another chapter in the silent hunter franchise.

CCIP's analysis proves a good subsim can be made with profit. Only problem is to make game developer to understand this. You call it fantasy I call it innovation. With current attitude next subsim will come out in ten years and has 1 in 2 chance to be crappy.

You must have missed the part where he wrote:
So I think the problem is not budget at all. The problem is having a business model. No one right now has a good business model for marketing a new submarine sim. Money isn't a problem in the first place anyway because a group of people can easily obtain business loans for even the most extravagant budget. But how do they make it back and not get burned?
I will sit in at a poker game prepared to lose it all but really planning on coming out ahead. However the problems involved in creating a "good" subsim are huge starting with the unpleasant fact that there is no agreement as to what "good" actually means.

People still play Aces of the Deep and tolerate the primitive graphics and difficulties encountered running it on current operating systems because in many respects the gameplay provides the best available simulation of the U-Boat war.

Picture a graphically poor subsim with real physics, weather and damage simulation, an interactive BdU with shadowing and wolfpacks, full technical U-Boat management including simulated targeting and task delegation to a computer "crew", a realistic and challenging AI that evolves over the course of the war, historically reasonable career with historical flotillas and convoys using historical routes on real dates. This might be close to an ideal subsim for some but without the high-end graphics it would never be more than a minor niche in the gaming world.

Such a simulation is certainly possible but the chances of a mainstream company doing it is vanishingly small as is the potential market. On the other hand, a decision to forgo a sound and light spectacular would allow a small company to produce something like this since without a sophisticated graphics engine, the algorithms could be relatively straight forward to write code for and the historical data is readily available.

A subsim like this however "good" the potential game play is doomed as a commercial failure since, as we have seen with SH5, for the great majority here it's mostly about the graphics. It has been left to the very talented and dedicated Modding Community to enhance game play that should have been incorporated by the publisher.

Graphics are expensive and developer time finite so we have seen subsims steadily shed game play (read simulation) features while becoming more graphically impressive. It is probably safe to say that you cannot have it all and the divergence between "simulation" and "game" is growing for many reasons that need not be repeated here.

Any "SH6" would have to come from UBISoft who have pretty much burned their bridges in the subsim community. They own the Silent Hunter trademark and unless they sell or licence it out there can be no more Silent Hunter games unless they produce it. Of course any SH6 would automatically incorporate their UBI Play DRM scheme that proved so popular with SH5's release.

Get 20k members of the community to agree on the features to be incorporated into the next generation subsim AND pony up $50.00 (or equivalent) each to start development and I will gladly, humbly and publicly acknowledge that I am entirely wrong and kick in my ante. Good luck with that.

The subject of what makes a "good" subsim is one that is certainly worthy of discussing since there are so many points of view. However, the consistent pining for an SH6 to be produced by "someone" as if by magic and without a shred of realistic assessment of the challenges involved grows increasingly tiresome. There is nothing innovative in ignoring the real world.

[Sailor Steve]

No need for unanimously agreement. Just 50$ spent on pre order. I and many others have lost more to gambling.
Pre-orders are usually based on a product nearing completion. Giving someone any amount of money based on a promise of what might be two years down the road is folly. If I had the money I'd fund it myself, but I'd also be on top of it from start to finish. If someone shows a plan and asks for investors, maybe. But pay for the finished product before it's even planned, let alone started? No chance.

[Jimbuna]

I know and understand where your coming from Obltn Strand but my position would be the same as Steve.

[VONHARRIS]

I have to agree with Jimbuna and Sailor Steve on that one.
I would also to add the following:
Why do we even discuss about a SH6 series?
After all this modding done to SH3 the game has changed completely and I think it is very close to a good subsim.
Sometimes it becomes unstable but I can live with it.
Moreover , I don't like SH4 or SH5 at all despite their better graphics!

[Fish In The Water]

Moreover , I don't like SH4 or SH5 at all despite their better graphics!

I hear you on that one. The eye candy may be nice but they lack the depressing mood (i.e. grit) of SH3. For me that's the make or break factor. :DL

[Jimbuna]

Still early days for SH5.

Given time and a similar amount of effort as that what was given to SH3 and you just never know what you'll end up with.

[Victor Schutze]

"Get 20k members of the community to agree on the features to be incorporated into the next generation subsim AND pony up $50.00 (or equivalent) each to start development"

I am willing to do so. :yep:

"Giving someone any amount of money based on a promise of what might be two years down the road is folly"

This is no coincidence: I am crazy about SH3. I just spent $100 on a new PSU.
I can invest $50 now and another $50 at a later date on a good u-boat sim. :yep:

"graphically good subsim with real physics, weather and damage simulation, an interactive BdU with shadowing and wolfpacks, full technical U-Boat management including simulated targeting and task delegation to a computer "crew", a realistic and challenging AI that evolves over the course of the war, historically reasonable career with historical flotillas and convoys using historical routes on real dates."

PRICELESS! :woot::woot::woot::woot::woot:

20,000 crazies like me? Yes, we can find them. This should not be difficult to find. We already have one: just 19,999 to go. :rotfl2:

Nowadays people "burn" far more money on all sorts of nonsense.

Who else with me? :arrgh!:

[PappyCain]

:har: silly stuff IMHO. Perhaps build a subsim all in one package that includes a mission specific bespoke computer shaped like a Uboat conning tower, include a diesel fume generator, a barf, smoke, and soiled clothes stink machine, maggots that slink out of the unit, gimbal the screen, have a refillable blood squirt port, salt water spray nozzles, oh yeah ... an auto lock on your toilet door so you cannot use it when you please... only 22K per unit.

Me, I hate computers, the constant upgrades, the new OS requirements, bigger this and larger that ... I am very pleased with SH3 and Commander and the talented modders efforts. Got to run, tertiary bilge pump bearing broke and oily water on my imported Ming Dynasty rug from WalMart...

:salute:

[Randomizer]

^ What he says; no further comment is necessary.

[Victor Schutze]

:yawn:

[Obltn Strand]

I know and understand where your coming from Obltn Strand but my position would be the same as Steve.

Pre-orders are usually based on a product nearing completion. Giving someone any amount of money based on a promise of what might be two years down the road is folly. If I had the money I'd fund it myself, but I'd also be on top of it from start to finish. If someone shows a plan and asks for investors, maybe. But pay for the finished product before it's even planned, let alone started? No chance.
Collecting huge amounts of money requires some sort of joint venture and treasury = organization recognized by law. People get funny ideas towards embezzlement when dealing with large sums.
Gaming company doesn't receive any money until agreement in writing exist.


The subject of what makes a "good" subsim is one that is certainly worthy of discussing since there are so many points of view. However, the consistent pining for an SH6 to be produced by "someone" as if by magic and without a shred of realistic assessment of the challenges involved grows increasingly tiresome. There is nothing innovative in ignoring the real world.

Only way to define a good submarine sim is through discussion. Cutting some cornes makes good and possible subsim.
Now I can't even begin imagine the challenges involved. Building a real type VII replica is more my area of expertise.

I can't come up with better idea than fund raising to get some game company to produce a "good" subsim and hear us. Never said it was easy and it won't happen as if by magic. Honestly I don't even have slightest clue how to make it happen.

But instead of pining for SH6 I try to produce new ideas. Something that haven't done before.

[mookiemookie]

So the short answer is probably $2-3 million even with modest effort.


That sounds low. According to Ubi:

Leading on from this, an Ubisoft executive gave a breakdown of the company's average development costs per game - with a DS title costing between 500,000 to 1,000,000 euros ($785,000-$1.57m), PS3/Xbox 360/PC titles averaging 12 million to 18 million euros ($18.8m-$28.2m) to create for all 3 SKUs, and a Wii game expected to cost 5 million to 6 million euros ($7.8-$9m) to develop.

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=18389

Let's say your PC exclusive subsim costs as much as a Wii title to create. You're talking $8 to 9 million before you ever see a dime of profit. Even if you wanted to lowball it and say it was only half as expensive, you're still talking $4 to $4.5 million.

And the $50 earned per unit number isn't realistic. In a traditional brick and mortar distribution system, the publishers gross margin is 30%, and even in a digital distro system like Steam, you're earning 70%. (http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2011/02/14/valve-more-profitable-per-head-than-google/1)

So doing some quick back of the envelope calculations:

If your list price on your game is:
$50 for the first 6 months and you earn 70% of your sales in this time frame
$30 for another 12 months after that and you earn another 20% in this time frame
$20 for another 12 months after that and you earn 10% during this time

Then the weighted average price of the game is $43. (Note: I completely spitballed these figures. I have no idea what the sales life cycle of a game is.)

Let's say for simplicity's sake, you only do digital distribution. You earn 70% of your $43 average sales price over the life of the game. You're only taking in roughly $30 per unit sold.

How many units sold at $30 do you need to break even with say a $4,000,000 development cost? 133,333. That's breaking even. No profit. And assuming all digital distribution and the higher gross margin that comes with it.

Using sales figures estimated by Neal here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1270494&postcount=3), it seems like you can probably expect to sell 100,000 to 200,000 copies of a subsim worldwide. Your max income is gonna be $6,000,000 in the best case scenario (70% gross margin, 200,000 copies sold). Meaning that you have to keep the costs under $6,000,000 or you don't make anything on the project.

Less than $6,000,000 and you have people around here that want every bit of the world modelled in a subsim. Right down to every piece of seagull crap on the conning tower. It's not gonna happen. As we saw above, costs aren't going to be that low and you're not going to sell 200,000 using only digital distribution.

The numbers just don't add up in a profitability sense.

[Ducimus]

Personally, I also think SH4 and 5 get unfair flak as being 'botched' and 'worse' than SH3 - they were not. People really need to go back and remember SH3 as it was when it first came out. It's just that SH3 came after a long drought and filled an empty niche. I think very few people these days remember what SH3 was actually like when it first came out, and tend to compare 4 and 5 to what it became (largely thanks to mods) rather than on their own merits. That's not to say 4 and 5 shouldn't have been more, but the rumors of their being worse than 3 are greatly exaggerated. But they came at a point when the target market was already saturated. SH4 tried to capture that market with another theater, wasn't a significant technical improvement over 3 (although still an improvement), but that market was so sold on SH3 that many were too loyal to the Atlantic theater to give the Pacific a fair try. IMHO as both a game and a platform for mods, SH4 is far better than SH3. It's only because of loyalty of the fanbase to its predecessor that it never took off. SH5 instead tried to expand the market to more casual players - again, not a terrible idea, and again many good concepts. Sadly money ran out before ambitions, and the design was never really finished, and support cut off early. But as released, I'd argue it was better than SH3. It was just that we came to expect a lot more thanks to SH3, which brought something incredibly fresh to the table that, for all its flaws, still turned out to be exactly what so many of us wanted for years.

Give it a few years for technology to get substantially ahead, and the thirst for a new subsim will come back.

I wholeheartedly agree.


I hear you on that one. The eye candy may be nice but they lack the depressing mood (i.e. grit) of SH3. For me that's the make or break factor. :DL

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=132&pictureid=803
Post with more of an explanation here. (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1775317&postcount=19)

[Raptor]

One has only to remember the trouble the Wolfpack League had getting the members to fund Project Messerwetzer:wah:, which was merely a mega-mod to improve SH2 to see that any idea of a user-funded full-fledged sim is a non-starter.

It makes a nice philosophical discussion topic, but it's going nowhere.

Better we spend our spare time shopping for Christmas presents.

[Obltn Strand]

Let's say your PC exclusive subsim costs as much as a Wii title to create. You're talking $8 to 9 million before you ever see a dime of profit. Even if you wanted to lowball it and say it was only half as expensive, you're still talking $4 to $4.5 million.
With those numbers it's either winning ticket in lottery or a rich dilettante with lots of money and less common sense

And the $50 earned per unit number isn't realistic. In a traditional brick and mortar distribution system, the publishers gross margin is 30%, and even in a digital distro system like Steam, you're earning 70%. (http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2011/02/14/valve-more-profitable-per-head-than-google/1)

Surprisingly high, I estimated 20%.

So doing some quick back of the envelope calculations:

If your list price on your game is:
$50 for the first 6 months and you earn 70% of your sales in this time frame
$30 for another 12 months after that and you earn another 20% in this time frame
$20 for another 12 months after that and you earn 10% during this time

Then the weighted average price of the game is $43. (Note: I completely spitballed these figures. I have no idea what the sales life cycle of a game is.)

Let's say for simplicity's sake, you only do digital distribution. You earn 70% of your $43 average sales price over the life of the game. You're only taking in roughly $30 per unit sold.

How many units sold at $30 do you need to break even with say a $4,000,000 development cost? 133,333. That's breaking even. No profit. And assuming all digital distribution and the higher gross margin that comes with it.

Using sales figures estimated by Neal here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1270494&postcount=3), it seems like you can probably expect to sell 100,000 to 200,000 copies of a subsim worldwide. Your max income is gonna be $6,000,000 in the best case scenario (70% gross margin, 200,000 copies sold). Meaning that you have to keep the costs under $6,000,000 or you don't make anything on the project.

Less than $6,000,000 and you have people around here that want every bit of the world modelled in a subsim. Right down to every piece of seagull crap on the conning tower. It's not gonna happen. As we saw above, costs aren't going to be that low and you're not going to sell 200,000 using only digital distribution.

The numbers just don't add up in a profitability sense.
:nope: Price doubled and abandon all hope.

[Ducimus]

Considering one of the lead designers of the SH series is no longer employed at Ubisoft, id say the chances of another SH title just became a lot less.

[Leandro]

Good morning, dear comrades.
I believe that soon we will have another naval simulator in hand, if one follows the development of shipbuilding nations should already be aware of changes in naval warfare, especially in the field of submarine warfare.
For example see the Naval Force North American, so I will talk about the submarines, we have the Los Angeles class attack submarine built since 1972, with 43 ***8203;***8203;units on active duty, a few years we have had a reasonable simulation to represent him, who here has not played Hunter Killer 688 (i)?
Then we have the last breath of the cold war the Seawolf class SSN, perhaps the most expensive submarine ever built, designed to replace the Los Angeles class planned to be made 30 units starting at 1989, with only three built, was canceled for two reasons:
First - very expensive;
Second - the end of the Cold War.
Designed to be the hunter supreme on the seas is a specialized unit to combat the deep sea, really the technology involved in its construction surpassed, and much, various nations that make use of a submarine force respectable, but never had an unhappy mind simulator represent him, made ***8203;***8203;a cameo in the game of strategy at Jane's, Jane's Fleet Command.
Here are the features of this war machine incredible:

Seawolf design
The Seawolf's modular design introduces important improvements and innovations. It has greater manoeuvrability than the Los Angeles Class, space for later upgrades and weapons developments, and better sonars.
The Seawolf has a submerged displacement of 9,137t dived (12,139t for the Jimmy Carter), and 8,060t surfaced. Full acoustic cladding has been installed. It has a maximum speed of 35kt dived, and a 'silent' speed of 20kt. It has a crew of 116 personnel, including 15 officers. With a diving depth of 610m, it has been designed with a sub-ice capability, with retractable bow planes.

Combat system
The combat data system is a Lockheed Martin BSY-2 with a network of some 70 or so 68030 Motorola processors. This being replaced by the Raytheon AN/BYG-1 combat system. Weapons control is managed by the Raytheon mk2 fire control system.

Missiles
Like the improved Los Angeles Class, the Seawolf does not have any external weapons. The submarine is armed with both the land-attack and anti-ship version of the Tomahawk missile from Raytheon. The land-attack Tomahawk has a range of 2,500km. A TAINS (Tercom aided inertial navigation system) guides the missile towards the target flying at subsonic speed at an altitude of 20m to 100m.
Tomahawk can be fitted with a nuclear warhead,a;though it is not normally carried. Block III improvements include an improved propulsion system and Navstar global positioning system (GPS) guidance capability. The anti-ship Tomahawk missile is equipped with an inertial guidance and an active radar and anti-radiation homing head. The range is up to 450km.
The first underwater launch of the new Raytheon Tactical Tomahawk block IV missile took place in November 2002. Block IV includes a two-way satellite link that allows reprogramming of the missile in flight and transmission of battle damage indication (BDI) imagery. The missile entered service with USN surface ships in September 2004.
The Seawolf Class also carries the Harpoon anti-ship missile from Boeing. Sub-harpoon uses active radar homing to deliver a 225kg warhead. The range is 130km and the speed is high subsonic.

Torpedoes
Seawolf has eight 660mm torpedo tubes for launching torpedoes and missiles. 50 missiles / torpedoes are carried. The Gould mk48 ADCAP torpedoes combat both high-performance surface ships and fast deep-diving submarines. The torpedo has a 267kg warhead. It is capable of operating with or without wire guidance and uses either or both active and passive homing. Range is 50km (active) and 38km (passive)

Countermeasures
Countermeasures include the Northrop Grumman WLY-1 torpedo decoy system and a GTE WLQ-4(V)1 electronic countermeasures (ECM) system.

Sensors
The submarine's sonar suite is the BQQ 5D with bow-mounted active / passive arrays and wide aperture passive flank arrays.
Also fitted are TB-16 surveillance and TB-29 tactical towed arrays, which will be replaced by the TB-29A thin-line towed array being developed by Lockheed Martin, and BQS 24 active sonar for close range detection.
The Seawolf submarines are being upgraded with the Lockheed Martin AN/BQQ-10(V4) sonar processing system under the acoustic-rapid commercial-off-the-shelf insertion (A-RCI) programme.
BPS 16 radar, operating at I band, is fitted for navigation.
Propulsion
The nuclear-powered Seawolf has a GE PWR S6W reactor system, two turbines rated 52,000hp (38.8MW), a pumpjet propulsor, a single shaft, and one secondary propulsion submerged motor.

Now let's see the newest class of attack submarine, the Virginia class.
With the new change in submarine warfare we see that the U.S. Navy had to adapt to new scenarios.
As we no longer have the Cold War, the Virginia is a submarine multi-tasking, with main emphasis on war litoranea, deposition of commands, The NAVY SEAL, electronic warfare, it is a fully digital submarine, your navigation commands, GPS, especially the periscope.
These changes were caused by an old / new submarine! Who thought that the era of non-nuclear-powered submarines were relegated to the past is better to think again and change this view with the new technology AIP, Air Independent Propulsion, this class was revitalized!
Smaller, quieter than a nuclear submarine, the ability to stay under water for 45 days and its main feature, cheaper than a nuclear submarine, any nation with a coastline can now have its submarine force! Analysts Navy did a recent study of future conflicts involving naval forces and they were really worried, they said "Nothing good is a Aircraft Carriers if it can be sunk by three torpedoes from a submarine AIP!" segudo what is believed to from 3 to 5 this class submarines in the Persian Gulf would become a real headache for U.S. naval forces patrolling that, now imagine the other nations that are not aligned with the politics of the United States of America acquired a considerable amount of these submarines! In the last year of naval warfare conducted by the United States with the participation of submarines from Germany, Sweden and Norway (major producers of submarine technology AIP) they were extremely efficient and completed all the objectives without any of the submarines involved were neutralized.
In Russia, with a long tradition in the manufacture of submarines began to develop its class of AIP submarines for export and many countries have already interested in acquiring the Russian AIP submarines that have great advantages in cost / time / benefit.
See the statistics of a Virginia-class:
http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/SHIP_SSN_Virginia_Class_Cutaway_lg.jpg
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/virginia-block-iii-the-revised-bow-04159/

see the statistics of a class AIP:
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/type_212/

But that does not mean that the era of nuclear submarines in the deep sea is over, countries such as China and India has planned to construct their versions of these fantastic machines of war, in particular China has been developing technology and a naval force with odd surface and submarine forces and consistent.
With these data, I believe that soon appeared a simulator, some commanders of the U.S. Navy already considers the production of such a simulator to attract staff to join the Navy because according to these commanders own words "With the production of a simulator for the common market surely attract personnel for school sailors submariners, and so we can integrate the old school of submariners with the new generation by facilitating training, because we are rewriting the manual for submarine warfare. "see the example of America's Army players which ascribed a personal defeat in the Military Academy at West Point, noting that the simulator has a great importance in training the armed forces.
I hope that my article was not tedious to those who read and who has served for any use.
I end with a phrase used by submariners:
"At sea there are two types of vessels:
the Submarine
and targets. "
A great weekend everyone.

[USS Drum]

A British campaign?

[Koenig-Hessler]

it has been confirmed that Ubisoft will release a new Silent Hunter.

Silent Hunter Online.

although not much information has been given, i watched the trailer of it.

It does appear the setting will be the same or contain the same as SH5.

only that now we can work together and form wolfpacks.

it may come out this year sometime as a beta or in the next.

i don't know about you guys, but i say SH series still got some life in it.

[Jimbuna]

it has been confirmed that Ubisoft will release a new Silent Hunter.

Silent Hunter Online.

although not much information has been given, i watched the trailer of it.

It does appear the setting will be the same or contain the same as SH5.

only that now we can work together and form wolfpacks.

it may come out this year sometime as a beta or in the next.

i don't know about you guys, but i say SH series still got some life in it.

Only time will tell http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

[garren]

Why doesn't UBI just rework and combine Silent Hunter Online with Silent Hunter 5 to run together for those who own Silent Hunter 5 and to encourage more people to buy a copy of it in the future. For instance, you can run Silent Hunter Online by itself and lose out on all the eye-candy of Silent Hunter 5 but if you own Silent Hunter 5 you can run both at the same time and the crappy eye-candy of Silent Hunter Online is replaced with the graphics of Silent Hunter 5. So UBI could offer to sell Silent Hunter Online as a base game or WITH a copy of Silent Hunter 5 through it's digital download service combined with Silent Hunter Online to offer a more thorough and eye-pleasing game? And UBI could do this because they own the SDK and have the programmers to do it. Basically Silent Hunter Online would "call" for and control the resources of Silent Hunter 5. I mean, why let those resources go to waste? Silent Hunter 5 was a flop. But not entirely. It just needed more development time. Now they are developing a new game that's going to be a flop without the eye-candy and ability to walk around your u-boat. They could make something wonderful here and cash in some money off their loses for Silent Hunter 5. Instead, it just seems they are wasting more money and time making Silent Hunter Online and it will be a another commercial failure and will end the entire Silent Hunter franchise.