What would be your reaction if ......

[Drebbel]

What would be your reaction if ......

[joea]

Online play has some relevance to the Atlantic with the wolfpacks, but the US wolfpacks were never very big, not more than 3 subs IIRC. Anyway online is meaningless for both SHIII and IV without a new Destroyer Command. Voted no big deal.

[FAdmiral]

Multiplayer vs. Multiplayer is what I and most of us want.
Multiplayer vs. AI (like SH3) is ho-hum (no better but sometimes worse
than single campaign play)


JIM

[g-z]

I'm craving some LAN co-op.

[Rosencrantz]

Well, personally I'm not looking for a MP, so voted No big deal. I think Joea has a good point of view anyway.

-RC-

[CCIP]

No reaction whatsoever. I don't do multiplayer :smug:

[CWorth]

I had to vote..."Good, now the dev's have more time to code single play"

Only because I have no interest in multiplay in these games..Single play is where it is at.

[Sailor Steve]

Co-op doesn't interest me in the least, and since actual versus play is almost certainly not going to happen, I'd prefer them to concentrate on getting the game right.

[STEED]

My vote went for Good, now the dev's have more time to code single play

[goldorak]

No multiplayer = no sale.

Seriously if an 8 year old software such as falcon 4 can deliver dynamic single player missions (campaign) and multiplayer dynamic campaign there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for developers not including such a feature in sh iv.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

To be fair though, SH3 had its fair share of multiplayer problems. Playing behind a router? Good luck.

Make a good single player game and I'll be a happy little Englander. Besides, there are still clans and the like that'll no doubt pop up, like Sturmgruppewulf I think for SH3. But yeah, my votes with the "no big deal" MP would be nice, but its not essential.

[Torplexed]

It's Solitaire for me too.

[DeepSix]

More time to code single player.:up: IMHO multiplayer is a total waste of time. What I'd rather see, instead of online mp, is the programming time spent incorporating AI wolf packs into single player, since it seems like wolfpacking is one of the few reasons (again, IMO) to bother with MP.

[Bum]

Why is it so hard to take a sub model, reskin it as a DD, add a few stations, write in surface only attributes, and then you have DD vs Sub multiplayer?

[rls669]

Making a bug-free, balanced game from the DD point of view would take just as much work as doing the same from the sub's pov. It's hardly a matter of just "reskinning a sub model".

[CB..]

when it comes to multiplayer i think most folks would rather some one some where just released a combined multiplayer only version of SH2 and DC as a new and sorted game with a small hike in graphics if their bored (heck just replace the stock textures with more professionaly drawn ones would do the trick)

would you buy it---course you would --i know i would and i never play on line---which is weird when i come to think of it--:rotfl:


for single player and SH4 i would much rather be dealing with proper AI wolfpacks and reading contact reports from the AI than being called gay by some human "player" with an inferiority complex --

make em use morse code that'll sort 'em out--

[andy_311]

never play MP

[GV_Darkata]

Salve sono GV_Darkata, Italiano scusate ma non capisco niente di inglese,quindi meglio che scrivo nella mia lingua,:D io con il mio clan giochiamo sempre ad sH3 Uman vs Uman (sub vs sub) per avere sempre l'adrenalina a massimo, troviamo noioso affondare nemici che non si possono difendere o difendere male come l'IA dei destroyer. secondo me non ha senso un gioco come shIV sensa multiplayer sarebbe troppo noioso combattere contro l'Ia troppo stupida e prevedibile, e poi volete mettere una bella battaglia sub. Americani vs sub. Tedeschi??:D :D :D

ciao un saluto a tutti e complimenti per il forum.

P.S. se vi state chiedendo come fare a giocare sub. vs sub. venite ogni sera in UBI.COM troverete sempre qualche stanza aperta per giocare e sarete i benbevuti;)

avevo gia risposto a questa domanda su questo
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=89999
ciao, e spero che qualcuno possa tradurre

[Gizzmoe]

scusate ma non capisco niente di inglese

Sorry, but then you shouldn´t post here. :) At least *try* to write in English, doesn´t matter how bad your grammar is...

[Drebbel]

doesn´t matter how bad your grammar is...

Hee, be carefull mate, what does his granma have to do with this ??? Show a litle respect for the elderly !!! :p

[FesterShinetop]

Never tried MP in SHIII and I didn't miss it. I think this is just not a MP kinda game actually (well not my kinda MP game to be more precise). So let them just focus on getting the SP really good.

[TreverSlyFox]

I have to answer "Good, now the dev's have more time to code single play."


Multi-play doesn't intrest me because of a slow wire dial-up connection and no hope for Fiber optic for at least 3-5 years. Besides Multi-play could be an Add-on sold later, again something they could devote their time and budget too when it was developed.

[Wilko]

"Good, now the dev's have more time to code single play."

tried MP once in my life and it was for a FPS and all I got was a bunch of numbnuts hopping around :doh: :rotfl: there and then I swore off MP and I have never and will never entertain the thought of MP in any game again :nope:

[Safe-Keeper]

I just wish the Mission Generator was available for single-player use, too. It's a decent, simple tool, but it's tedious to play it alone on x1 Time Compression for no reason.

It depends on the genre, really.

FPS: MP all the way. Stupid or nonexistent bots, smart humans (for the most part:rolleyes:)
RTS: Scenario Design and scenarios.
Sim: SP all the way.

[Egan]

Forget the MP altogether. Get rid of that code and use the dev time for something juicy. I don't think there is a MP element in any game that I have played for more than a couple of days before getting very bored with it. I ofen get the feeling that devs embrace MP so they can cut corners on things like believable AI or decent campaigns and storytelling. I'm fed up of it.

[DeepSix]

Forget the MP altogether. Get rid of that code and use the dev time for something juicy. I don't think there is a MP element in any game that I have played for more than a couple of days before getting very bored with it. ....

:yep:, and IMO MP is useful mainly as a way to sell more copies - at least in the FPS world. Not that I don't want the game to sell, mind.

[Egan]

But that is the problem with MP. Most devs don't seem to be able to look beyond a very FPS style of doing things. Perhaps MP would work in this but it is going to take a darn sight more imagination that having a dozen players hook up for a mock wolf pack mission. Maybe you are right in suggesting that a game with no MP would not sell well, but the results of this small poll would seem to suggest otherwise at the moment. If a dev created a subsim that was heavilly MP I simply would not buy it. Swings and roundabouts.

[DeepSix]

But that is the problem with MP. Most devs don't seem to be able to look beyond a very FPS style of doing things.

I think that hits the nail on the head, and my apologies, because I think I gave you the wrong impression. I just meant that MP makes things more FPS-like, but I don't think that necessarily makes the game better. My opinion is that MP is included so often in games because it acts as a sales tool; if a game is an online frag-fest that every kid and burning dog will be playing because it's the "in" thing, maybe they won't notice that it's utterly formulaic and in no way different from any other FPS out there.:p Spend $50 or $60 to do the same thing you spent $50 or $60 on last year (and that you could get now in the bargain rack for $20). I don't want MP in SH4, either. If it is there, I just won't play it.

What I would much rather see is a skillful incorporation of the ostensible reason for doing MP - wolfpacks - into the single player game.

[Edit - my vote was for "good, more time for single player"] :)

[Safe-Keeper]

MP Careers would be nice. Time compression could be built in, if all players entered the navigation map at the same time.

And DeepSix and Egan are dead on the money: Both RTS and FPS games, and to a degree simulators, tend to have to be as simplistic as possible these days. Try to build in something that makes you have to think a little and you're flooded with "gameplay>realism" messages. Simplicity is what sells today, so thank Godness for the Forgotten Hope mod series.

PS: The poll is biased. If you're for MP, you can tell whether or not you strongly dislike that it's removed. If you're against MP, you have to say you're heavily in favour of its removal. Tsk, tsk, the things that happen when 'n0ObZ' play with such advanced forum features.

[Threadfin]

I enjoy multiplayer. I am in a couple of racing leagues (GPL, F1C), I fly Falcon 4 online, Il-2 online, Operation Flashpoint, and other sims as well. Even so I find that sub sims just don't lend themselves well to MP. I wouldn't mind if there were no MP in SH4. Like Egan said I'd rather that developement time went to other things.

That said, if there were some brilliant way to incorporate a multiplayer career/campaign I'd be all for it. But for more of what we have in SH3? Don't want it.

[Egan]

Deepsix: Sorry mate if I jumped the gun and got it wrong. I've been doing that all day..:D

I wonder how many devs actually sit down and think about whether Mp is really needed in a game these days or whether they just do it automatically. Threadfin makes a good point: Subsims, being a recreation of what, for 90% of the time is a rather solitary affair, don't lend themselves to MP very well in the way that, say a squad based shooter does.

[CB..]

if they want to add some sort of on-line multiplayer capability to SH4 then they should consider a much more esoteric approach--breaking away from the FPS type "im the king of the castle" "lets have a look at the old score board" rubbish-- and creating something usable -intelligent-- and fun--

a subsim is absolutely perfect for this--due to it's slow paced gameplay--

in some flight simulators they give you the option of going online to download real world weather into the game --you can then log off and play off-line use-ing real world weather modelled for your area or the entire world for that day--


now im not saying this would be in any way realistic when use-ing real world 2006 weather in a 1940's WW2 simulator (lol)-- but would any one really care?? i'd do it..
stuff like that might actually be more interesting than multiplayer--

perhaps you could log on line download shipping reports etc and have certain convoys etc etc automatically loaded into the campaign along with radio traffic intelligence reports etc etc--a sort of dynamic campaign that updated from a central server (which could be set up by groups of players) and could either be simply downloaded at mission start (then you can discconnect and play it off line) OR you can stay on line and have certain information up-date automatically when you use a "refresh" button in the subs radio room--even to the extent of getting feedback contact reports map icons etc from other players on line at the same time--all this could be done with-out the need for any 3D information being exchanged--you'd never be able to meet another human player but you could still recieve contact reports from them etc etc--

this would allow for a massively multiplayer style of server with out the actual need for any 3d information being exchanged--

sure it's flawed in that if you and fred bloggs went to the same location on the map you wouldn't see each other --but come on--bit of imagination is neccessary in all games--with this approach you get all the immersion of the single player campaign but with some of the elements of multiplayer that are relevant to that immersion--

you'd basically be just downloading text into your campaign--radio messages contact reports -campaign file entrys

heck the info could automatically place an AI sub at Fred Bloggs location just for atmopsheres sake after getting a contact report from a human player stateing he is at such and such a location--

[Safe-Keeper]

You might want to try out World War II online. Only played the trial version (which is solitary off-line only), but I'm pretty sure it's got subs in it.

The immersion you describe is possible to an extent, but I don't think it's a good idea. Let's leave that type of gaming to an actual MMORPG. A limited number of players, such as 2-6, undertaking career missions together? No problem at all, if the time compression issue could be addressed.

As for history, it'd be great if you could tune in to radio broadcasts from the actual date you're playing. Is there an archive with radio broadcasts from every single day? Sounds a bit too much to hope for (not to mention cram into a disc, even one or more DVDs, considering there's supposed to be a game on them, too:p), but it'd be really immersive.

[Der Teddy Bar]

The best multiplayer idea I have heard is credited to Ubisoft's Cristian Hriscu.

I am going off memory here. As I recall his idea was that all of the escorts be controlled by one person in a non captain role. That is, ordering the escort ships but not playing them.

This is not a SHIV feature.... May never happen... Ever...

Personally, for me there is the issue of having enough time to not have a gamey battle coupled with the issue of everyone having enough time to play. In the end I still feel that this would be a waste of resources.

[CB..]

i think your missing the point..

[NightCrawler]

Some games will come up to pay online, and download a software to log on there server..

on COD2, you can make your own server(even today everybody have DLS or faster)...
I like to play online, but no pay thing otherwise i play carreer mode...

Hopefully SHIV will come up with "make your own server" so that people can join on your LAN(connected with WAN).. and play online..

[FAdmiral]

So far, the AI lacks creativity and much versatility in what it does.
This makes the game boring to me after playing it for any length of time.
I have played many games and after going to the forum where players
talk about their exploits in those games, I realize that humans are very
creative and the AI is not at all. Game in question, HOI2-DD, playing it
now but I know the AI in my single-player game will NEVER do some of the
things I read about at the forum and I miss that. Online gaming is achieving an all time high and is growing very fast. Human vs. human is still the most challenging way to play any game. And right now for the game devs, its cheaper and faster
to add multiplay than it is to bring the AI up to human standards or maybe
that will NEVER happen enough to the players satisfaction.....


JIM

[DeepSix]

... And right now for the game devs, its cheaper and faster
to add multiplay than it is to bring the AI up to human standards or maybe
that will NEVER happen enough to the players satisfaction.....


JIM

I agree but that's also what I don't like about MP (well, one of the things, anyway) - it's a "lowest common denominator" way to do AI.

[Safe-Keeper]

So far, the AI lacks creativity and much versatility in what it does.Not to mention that...
Ships love to run aground.
German torpedo boat crews never try to avoid hitting you.
Merchants never increase their speed or change their course when attacked, they just zig-zag. It'd be nice if it went towards the closest port or the closest friendly warship or something. Likewise, they never ram you.
No stragglers (ships getting lost from convoys).
Ships don't retreat when outnumbered. Commerce Raider captain: "Is that a task force of a fleet carrier, two cruisers, five destroyers, and a battleship in our path? Charge!" [Dead Commerce Raider].
Ships don't worry about line of sight/fire, neither when firing, nor when detecting you. If there's a merchant between you and the destroyer, it's dead. If there's a hill between you and the destroyer, the destroyer sees right through it - and then attempts to fire through it ("damn, why go around, let's just blast ourselves a canal through here with our guns:arrgh!:!").
No torpedo code has been scripted for the AI (leaving the Elco laughably underpowered against subs).
Axis warships don't deviate from their assigned patrol route, even when there's a merchant or convoy only 20 km away from them.
Planes don't dogfight (although planes with turrets use them against fighters).To Heck with Multi-Player, get our Artificial "Intelligence" enemies' warped minds fixed!

[PeriscopeDepth]

Certainly SP features are more important to me.

Do you know something we don't Drebbel?

PD

[Drebbel]

Do you know something we don't Drebbel?


Of course ! For instance the name of my brothers dog :p

[DeepSix]

Scandalous!:lol:

[JU_88]

Its been said before, and I'll say it again.

SH MULTI PLAYER IS WORTHLESS WITHOUT DESTROYER COMMAND.#

-END TRANSMISSION......

[fredbass]

Its been said before, and I'll say it again.

SH MULTI PLAYER IS WORTHLESS WITHOUT DESTROYER COMMAND.#

-END TRANSMISSION......

Absolutely

[don1reed]

I voted for No MP.

However, rather than having wolfpacks in MP, I would instead like to see a "time-future" MP SUBSIM where the 6 or 8 players re-inacted the various Departments aboard the same sub., i.e.,

1 Skipper
1 Nav-Helmsman
1 Eng-Diving/Surfacing, control of individual motors (rpm), ballast.
1 Weaps-TDC
1 Sonor & Radar
1 Radio-with encrypted msgs

Multi-windows screen, if selected,
all hooked together with audio.