SH-IV Graphic Capabilites ?

[TonyPiech]

Just curious to know the graphic capabilities in SH-IV. If the sim is out in 2007, VISTA and DX-10 should be out; will SH-IV take advantage of those graphic features or will we be limited similar to what we had in SH-III?

Hopefully we can have some graphic scalability in SH-IV.

[MadMike]

More focus needs to be on correcting deficiencies in off the shelf playability and historical accuracy, not high end graphics.

Yours, Mike

[John Channing]

More focus needs to be on correcting deficiencies in off the shelf playability and historical accuracy, not high end graphics.

Yours, Mike

While that may be true from the perspective of the so-called "hard core" grognard, that is certainly not what lead to sales in excess of 300,00 for Silent Hunter III (which is what had lead to Silent Hunter IV).

Top end graphics is what sells. Gameplay and immersiveness is what keeps 'em coming back.

And as to the ever growing urban myth about the state of release of Silent Hunter III, most of the "deficiencies in off the shelf playability" actually turned out to be deficiencies in people's systems or abilities to read the manual.

I know. I was one of the ones ammending the hundreds of threads that were headlined "NEW BUG" with the end-tag "SOLVED".

Any serious problems that did exist were subsequently and quickly corrected by the developers.

With over 15 years of experience with simulations I cannot remember one of this scope and magnitude that was in better shape out of the box.

And the proof is in the sales!

JCC

[TonyPiech]

More focus needs to be on correcting deficiencies in off the shelf playability and historical accuracy, not high end graphics.

Yours, Mike

Mike, I'd like to respectfully disagree; it may just be "different stokes for different folks" . I had a high-end machine for SH-III and I'll probably have even a higher-end machine for SH-IV. What I didn't get in SH-III was some form of graphic scalability, hopefully that will change in SH-IV. Those that have lower-and-midrange systems should have the capability to view SH-IV. However many computer gamers will move to VISTA and DX-10 when it arrives in January or February of 2007; the developers will hopefully recognize this certainty and give us something to play with rather than remain stuck in the past.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I'm guessing not. I do wonder if the game will be coded to take advantage of dual core systems though.

PD

[MobyGrape]

did a quick search on Widescreen..did not find anything..Will widescreen support be available with proper aspect..?

[Marriott]

I'd like to see better crew graphics. Seeing a nice beautiful sunset and great waves and rust on the boat and then turning and seeing horrific crewmembers that look like they were made with lego is abit of a dissapointment

[enaceo]

From what I see in the screen-shots the graphics look pretty good ,but they aren't really changed soo much from SH3-some new ,more "clean" textures,and some effects that were kind of poorly modeled in Sh3.I'm pretty confident that I'll be able to run it fine ,just like SH3.
I also would like to see some nice-looking crewmen,a little bit more "wear-and-tear" on the sub (that screenshot with the submarine is really cool) ,some more detailed rooms and less weird bugs when the crew-men are in the t-stance or their bodies/heads dissapear.Also,a bit more work on the damage textures would be in order:D
The water already looks pretty good ,so do the ships.The sub should be the "center of atention" for graphics improvements since you see it most of the time and interact with it most of the time.The other ships look fine in my opinion,and the only thing they need is a few more crewmen on deck and some lifeboats or other debris than boxes when they sink.

[Immacolata]

Not sure if the OP really understands what DX10 is all about. It is more of a redesign of the system, new driver model etc. And then there is shader model 4.0, Where DX9c runs 3.0 I think. Microsoft claims the rewrite will lead to much faster access times, but that is theoretical. Shader Model 4.0 is also a sort of rearrangement of the mechanics behind how you use pixel shaders. Again, this can lead to better performance.

So when you wish for DirectX 10, is that because you believe that DX10 automagically makes the game use better textures made by superior artists, more polygons in the models and will have shaded pixels coming out of its nose? Or is there some kind of specific advantage in DX10 that you know will provide a great boost to the design team of SHIV? They do not need to chase phantom technology to make SHIV look better. They just need better textures and more variation, higher poly count on some models. That is all it takes.

Oh, and by the way, MS claims that DX10 is Vista only. So if you run XP you will not be able to play SHIV, should they chose DX10 model.

[Driftwood]

Not sure if the OP really understands what DX10 is all about. It is more of a redesign of the system, new driver model etc. And then there is shader model 4.0, Where DX9c runs 3.0 I think. Microsoft claims the rewrite will lead to much faster access times, but that is theoretical. Shader Model 4.0 is also a sort of rearrangement of the mechanics behind how you use pixel shaders. Again, this can lead to better performance.

So when you wish for DirectX 10, is that because you believe that DX10 automagically makes the game use better textures made by superior artists, more polygons in the models and will have shaded pixels coming out of its nose? Or is there some kind of specific advantage in DX10 that you know will provide a great boost to the design team of SHIV? They do not need to chase phantom technology to make SHIV look better. They just need better textures and more variation, higher poly count on some models. That is all it takes.

Oh, and by the way, MS claims that DX10 is Vista only. So if you run XP you will not be able to play SHIV, should they chose DX10 model.

Damn! Decisions, decisions.......:D It's hard for me to imagine that this will be lost on Ubisoft. Especially considering that Vista is expected to be released around the same time as SHIV. Take a look at GRAW (a Ubi title). Its one of the first games on the market to make use of the new PhysX card for advanced graphics. Can they do any less for SHIV? I certainly hope not. I think John Channing hit the nail on the head earlier. While most of us who hang out in here can certainly be considered "hard core grognards" when it comes to sub simming, eye candy sells. Especially when it's teamed with a good sim.

[Safe-Keeper]

Top end graphics is what sells. Gameplay and immersiveness is what keeps 'em coming back.That might just be true, sadly:cry:.

And as to the ever growing urban myth about the state of release of Silent Hunter III, most of the "deficiencies in off the shelf playability" actually turned out to be deficiencies in people's systems or abilities to read the manual.The game was pretty defunct when it came out, and many of the things in it were bugs.

With all due respect to the developers, who probably did all they could to get things right, I don't think it's my inability to read the manual that causes destroyers to so frequently run aground. The game has its share of faults, and had even more of them when it came out.

With over 15 years of experience with simulations I cannot remember one of this scope and magnitude that was in better shape out of the box.That says more about the low standards than about the game, though, doesn't it? I enjoyed the unpatched Silent Hunter III, I really did, I also noticed that it needed patching.

I remember back in the old days when there was no such thing as "patches" and games were finished when they came out:-?...

[TDK1044]

SH1V is going to be targeted at XP. The number of Vista based computers sold at the time of the SH1V release will be relatively small, even assuming Microsoft hits their current deadline. Upon the release of Vista, a lot of people will wait at least 6 months to observe the new OS before upgrading. Therefore, from a sales point of view, it would be total madness to make SH1V a Vista based game. If you're looking to sell 300,000 copies of SH1V, you go with XP. If you're looking to sell under 10,000 copies, you go with Vista. Easy decision. Silent Hunter 5 is a different story!

[enaceo]

I personally will wait about an year,maybe more untill upgrading to Vista.Like all it's predecesors,it will have a lot of bugs/problems/incompatibilites which need time to get sorted out.I mean it took about 3-4 years after XP was released untill software makers stopped supporting 9x series completely.

[TonyPiech]

SH1V is going to be targeted at XP. The number of Vista based computers sold at the time of the SH1V release will be relatively small, even assuming Microsoft hits their current deadline. Upon the release of Vista, a lot of people will wait at least 6 months to observe the new OS before upgrading. Therefore, from a sales point of view, it would be total madness to make SH1V a Vista based game. If you're looking to sell 300,000 copies of SH1V, you go with XP. If you're looking to sell under 10,000 copies, you go with Vista. Easy decision. Silent Hunter 5 is a different story!

Why can't Ubi make SH-IV a VISTA and XP Sim? Microsoft is doing it with Flight Simulator X. It's to hit the shelves this October when all that's available is XP. When VISTA arrives, FSX will run on VISTA. Maybe Ubi isn't as big as MS, but it isn't a minor player in the video game market. I'll like to see the odds that SH-IV will hit the shelves in Q1 of 2007; it probably won't.

[CWorth]

My opinion is why should they create something for unproven technology.Neither Vista nor DX10 is even out yet.And we all know how screwed up M$'s first releases are.

So its best to wait and see how things turn out.That way bugs get worked out before Ubi needs to program for and then having to spend money and time fixing game glitches that occur due to said unproven technology.

[TDK1044]

I take your point, Tony, but making SH1V work for Vista and XP is not just a case of a few tweaks here and there. Ubisoft are very confident of a Q2 2007 release for SH1V (my guess would be April/May) and it'll be at least the Spring of 2008 before Microsofdt have ironed the bugs out of Vista and people start investing in that OS. SH1V will be an XP game...no doubt in my mind.

[Gizzmoe]

I take your point, Tony, but making SH1V work for Vista and XP is not just a case of a few tweaks here and there.

Most games run just fine under Vista. I don´t see a reason why SH4 shouldn´t work...

[fredbass]

I take your point, Tony, but making SH1V work for Vista and XP is not just a case of a few tweaks here and there. Ubisoft are very confident of a Q2 2007 release for SH1V (my guess would be April/May) and it'll be at least the Spring of 2008 before Microsofdt have ironed the bugs out of Vista and people start investing in that OS. SH1V will be an XP game...no doubt in my mind.

I'm sure Vista will need updates, but how bad the bugs only time will tell. Regardless, I'm willing to wager that when Vista comes out this coming Spring that it will sell like gangbusters no matter what. Sh4 will have to be fine for both Operating systems and just like XP, Vista will give us capabilities to play older games.

[STEED]

Sounds like us folks need information on the specs of SH4, A.S.A.P before it hits the shops. Is it possible to see this information? :hmm:

[Stary Wuj]

SH4 screenshots are heavily "photoshoped" , when You will carefully look on
game trailer you will see this is still good old SH3 graphic engine, it is OK for me.
And right - Windows Vista will be worth something with Service Pack 2 or 3 (4 mayby :-)

Could be nice with better looking submarine interiors and cremembers, but still
"less bugs" and realistic simulation is important for me.

Best Regards

Stary Wuj

[chris911]

When they use the same 3d modell engine for the units it won t be too difficult to include them into SH3 and we can get our World sim maybe vise versa is also possible if sh4 has a world map.

[trenken]

In today's gaming world, good graphics definitely translate into good sales. You can't put out another game that looks like SH3 who's graphics now look dated, and tell everyone to buy it because it's historically accurate. Good like finding 500,000 gamers that care solely about history. The game needs to look hot to get the kind of attention it needs to sell, and warrant the time and money spent to make SH5. They can pull it off on current hardware and XP and put out a decent looking game, but it would be in their best interest to make this a flagship game for Vista along with Halo 2. It would get a lot of attention, and I really think releasing this on Vista with DX10 might not translate into a ton of initial sales, but I think the game will sell more in the long run than if they kept it on XP.

Or the wiser choice would be to release 2 versions. But that's not likely.

[Driftwood]

I mentioned earlier that GRAW (Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter) is a Ubisoft title and it's using some of the latest, greatest graphics stuff (like the PhysX capability). Is it that difficult to incorporate this into a new title like SHIV? Or am I talking apples and oranges? Besides, even with all the "stuff" we had to go through with XP when it was first released, it was "backwards" compatible. So I'm thinking those of us who continue to be on the "bleeding edge" of technology, meaning Vista will be on our machines the day it hits the stores will have a few issues but nothing insurmountable. I for one am very much looking forward to having a 64 bit OS so I can take advantage of the hardware I've recently put together in anticipation of Vista's release.

[TDK1044]

[quote=trenken]In today's gaming world, good graphics definitely translate into good sales. You can't put out another game that looks like SH3 who's graphics now look dated, and tell everyone to buy it because it's historically accurate. Good like finding 500,000 gamers that care solely about history. The game needs to look hot to get the kind of attention it needs to sell

You make the technical point that the DEVs would make, but Sales and Marketing make the call, and they know two things; firstly that at the time of the game's release, 90 percent of their potential customers will be on XP and not Vista. Secondly, they know that in the video game business, the vast majority of your sales are made in the first 6 months after release, and that the money that comes in after that when the game is selling at $10 rather than $49 is pretty small in relative terms. So by December 2007, SH4 sales are pretty much done and most people are still using XP.

[Denson]

I think that we should be able to set the res the way we need. If someone can spend 450$ for GF 7900 GTX he'll set 1280x1024 or 1600x1200. I have a GF 6600gt and it's enough to play most of heavy DX 9 games with reasonable fps. Most ppl have mid range GFX, like the ATi 9800 pro ( asking if it's gonna run on it), GF 59xx and GF 6 series. With ATI's & Nvidia launching new top models every month your GFX becomes a oldie after 2 months.

[CWorth]

Vista may be all fine and dandy for the game no doubt,but who in their right mind will pay these prices for it..

Full Version
•Vista Ultimate $450
•Vista Business $341
•Vista Home Premium $269
•Vista Home Basic $233
Upgrade Version
•Vista Ultimate Upgrade $269
•Vista Business Upgrade $224
•Vista Home Premium Upgrade $179
•Vista Home Basic Upgrade $116

[Tonnage_Ace]

The Flight Simulator X guys have already stated that they'll release their game for XP and then release a patch making it compatible with DX10 in the future. No reason why Ubi can't do the same. Check out the screenshots for FSX here:

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/792/792287/img_3876936.html

The graphics illustrated here won't be available with the initial release but is what they hope to accomplish with the DX10 patch. The waves would fit in nicely with SH4:huh:

[Denson]

the FSX screes looks great but i remember what UBI dev team said in the interview about rendering the whole sub and the ability to walk in every compartiment. This may take another months to make it, who knows how it's gonna be for compatibilty. SH4 engine is based on SH3 with many things rewritten but i have no ideas if it will allow a patch for DX10. The dev team will make the game more easy to patch but a DX 10 patch seems to me a little bit too far. Maybe SH5 ???
I prefer to have a good working DX9 SH4 without bugs, and wait until Vista and DX10 become more common so the market, dev teams can adapt to the new possibilities.

And if DX10 would be possible on SH4 what kinda of GFX we would need to run it GF7950gx2 in SLI mode ??? And thos sub maniacs runing on good old ATI 9800 will see only a nice slideshow

[Immacolata]

Damn! Decisions, decisions.......:D It's hard for me to imagine that this will be lost on Ubisoft. Especially considering that Vista is expected to be released around the same time as SHIV. Take a look at GRAW (a Ubi title). Its one of the first games on the market to make use of the new PhysX card for advanced graphics. Can they do any less for SHIV? I certainly hope not. I think John Channing hit the nail on the head earlier. While most of us who hang out in here can certainly be considered "hard core grognards" when it comes to sub simming, eye candy sells. Especially when it's teamed with a good sim.

I think Ubi Soft will probably select a few Capital Ship games to carry them forth into the DX10 generation. But in the transition phase they will probably make sure their Lesser Games (such as SHIV) will work on Dx9 and XP as well as Vista. which means DX9-era graphics.

I suspect the PhysX card is dead in 1 year. Dual Core chips will overtake that market.

[Achtung Englander]

Why can't Ubi make SH-IV a VISTA and XP Sim? Microsoft is doing it with Flight Simulator X. It's to hit the shelves this October when all that's available is XP. When VISTA arrives, FSX will run on VISTA. Maybe Ubi isn't as big as MS, but it isn't a minor player in the video game market. I'll like to see the odds that SH-IV will hit the shelves in Q1 of 2007; it probably won't.

I think you will find that come 2007 they will announce Silent Hunter V and that will be Vista compatible

[tycho102]

I'm guessing not. I do wonder if the game will be coded to take advantage of dual core systems though.

PD

That is the only thing that I would like to ask of the actual game engine. That the engine is multi-threaded in whatever possible way. The physics would be best, since it's the most massive drain on the processor. If Ubisoft could break apart the sound, graphics, and physics into seperate contexts, people with dual-cores could get some real use from their systems.

It's doesn't have to have multithreaded sub-routines. Just break apart whatever you possibly can. Having the graphics and physics on seperate contexts would make all the difference in the world for time compression on the nav map.

This was one of the most interesting things about Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness (#6). They (Core) included multiple executables: one for MMX, one for SSE1, and another for SSE2/Multi-threading. The game didn't need multi-threading, since the graphics were far more complex than the physics or AI, but it was a good move by the developer.

[kapitanfred]

Well, I just hope SH IV caters for all ...end computers 'cos I'd hate to pay $2,370 for SH IV instead of whatever the cost of the game will be.

Pretty expensive program otherwise if u ask me!!

[Paajtor]

My son and myself are considering getting an X360 in the near future...anyone knows, if there are plans for SHIV to be released for this console?

Would be great to switch from watching DasBoot to SHIV, without even moving from the couch! :P

[TDK1044]

Why can't Ubi make SH-IV a VISTA and XP Sim? Microsoft is doing it with Flight Simulator X. It's to hit the shelves this October when all that's available is XP. When VISTA arrives, FSX will run on VISTA. Maybe Ubi isn't as big as MS, but it isn't a minor player in the video game market. I'll like to see the odds that SH-IV will hit the shelves in Q1 of 2007; it probably won't.

I think you will find that come 2007 they will announce Silent Hunter V and that will be Vista compatible

I very recently had a conversation that leads me to believe that SH1V will run on Vista. It's not yet official though.

[kapitanfred]

In today's gaming world, good graphics definitely translate into good sales. You can't put out another game that looks like SH3 who's graphics now look dated, and tell everyone to buy it because it's historically accurate. Good like finding 500,000 gamers that care solely about history. The game needs to look hot to get the kind of attention it needs to sell, and warrant the time and money spent to make SH5. They can pull it off on current hardware and XP and put out a decent looking game, but it would be in their best interest to make this a flagship game for Vista along with Halo 2. It would get a lot of attention, and I really think releasing this on Vista with DX10 might not translate into a ton of initial sales, but I think the game will sell more in the long run than if they kept it on XP.

Or the wiser choice would be to release 2 versions. But that's not likely.

Only if the average person can afford the upgrade!!!!!!!! As I stated in an earlier post of mine I don't personally intend to pay over $2,000 for a game. :nope: Good luck if you can afford to. And I most certainly see nothing wrong with the SH III graphics engine. Oh! and I would prefer to have 500,000 gamers that cared for history and buy the program knowing their comp can handle it then 1,000 gamers buying the game for graphic reasons only and can afford to "keep up with the technology" BIG difference in $$$$$ to me.

Well that's my opinion.

[TDK1044]

If you look at how Ubisoft set up SH111, right up until about a month before its release, the minimum RAM requirement was 256MB. That was then bumped to 512MB. The video card requirement was mid range (ATI 9000 series or higher)
In other words, Ubisoft were very aware of the fact that the largest percentage of people who would consider buying their product had mid range systems and not the high end bells and whistles systems.

This marketing ploy helped them achieve 300,000 sales of SH111 worldwide. I don't see them doing anything vey different with SH1V. I think that they will work hard to try and keep the RAM requirement to 512MB with a mid range video card such as the ATI 9600 or higher required. If the RAM requirement gets bumped to 1GIG and they were to bump the video card requirement too high they'd take a big sales hit.

I have a mid range system, and I've spoken to one of the DEVS who confirmed 'off the record' that my system would run the game. So I'm just going to wait for next Spring.

[Immacolata]

This marketing ploy helped them achieve 300,000 sales of SH111 worldwide. I don't see them doing anything vey different with SH1V. I think that they will work hard to try and keep the RAM requirement to 512MB with a mid range video card such as the ATI 9600 or higher required. If the RAM requirement gets bumped to 1GIG and they were to bump the video card requirement too high they'd take a big sales hit.

Oh, please! Marketing ploy :shifty:

If Ubi Soft runs like other game companies, they aim for some sweet spot between low specs and still high enough to run snazzy graphics. One of the reasons we was given the crippled 8000 m visual range SH3 was probably because Ubi and the devs were having an arguement over the system reqs. So in the end, the guys got 512 megs and agreed to lower the visual range. The sales guys want to increase their potential marketshare, the devs probably want a little more horsepower to do the sexy stuff they planned for.


This "ploy" of yours is not what helped ubi soft sell 300,000 copies. The quality of the game plus its relatively unique position - not a lot of subsims these days is the major reason. Perhaps even some of the fine mods we see. But you simply won't find a leg to stand on if you seriously think there was a ploy going.

[Immacolata]

[quote=PeriscopeDepth]

That is the only thing that I would like to ask of the actual game engine. That the engine is multi-threaded in whatever possible way. The physics would be best, since it's the most massive drain on the processor. If Ubisoft could break apart the sound, graphics, and physics into seperate contexts, people with dual-cores could get some real use from their systems.

I am afraid it is too early. The minority of pc's have dual core processors, and the benefit of this project will be limited. The only reason I can imagine that Ubi would allow it was if they somehow hoped to gain some long term benefit for their teams. The actual game SH4 is probably too minor a title. They can't be allowed to spend months experimenting with multithreading. As with the introduction of 3d, it requires some of the bold developers to push through. While id wouldn't know an original game concept if it came up and fragged them inna face, they do have a knack for taking up the latest trends in hardware. Quake 4 got multiple CPU support. I believe the havok engine is written for it as well.

[TDK1044]

Oh, please! Marketing ploy :shifty:

If Ubi Soft runs like other game companies, they aim for some sweet spot between low specs and still high enough to run snazzy graphics. One of the reasons we was given the crippled 8000 m visual range SH3 was probably because Ubi and the devs were having an arguement over the system reqs. So in the end, the guys got 512 megs and agreed to lower the visual range. The sales guys want to increase their potential marketshare, the devs probably want a little more horsepower to do the sexy stuff they planned for.


This "ploy" of yours is not what helped ubi soft sell 300,000 copies. The quality of the game plus its relatively unique position - not a lot of subsims these days is the major reason. Perhaps even some of the fine mods we see. But you simply won't find a leg to stand on if you seriously think there was a ploy going.[/quote]

Then replace the word 'ploy' with 'decision' if it makes your pants any less wet. The rest of your post reiterates my points, but using poor English and bad Grammar.