Hi. A friend told me you have this discussion here - again.

Tell you a story.

1. I bought DW second hand, half a year after release. The original customer, a friend's brother, did not like it, too many bugs that made subs far more buggy than in SC, he said.

2. While I owned it next, 1.03 was released, so I tried that one as well. Subs turned from bad to worse - I consider them to be unplayable. Subs are what is the major attraction of such a sim. Not the frigate, not the Orion, not the Helo - it's about the subs, and the subs for the most. Mess up the subs, and you lose customers. That simple.

3. I sold DW too, angered, and disappointed that they even topped the negative record in support I remembered from SC. I only kept the manual, which is top class. I think of keeping it as a strange way of compensation. :)

4. The customer complained to me some time later that I sold him a buggy product with unplayable sub, even with the latest patch. :hmm:

5. When DW was released, I wrote with constructive intention in a thread that Sonalysts should be aware that they have raised a well-known reputation of being bad supporters when it comes to patches, and that many people are interested in the matter of DW, but are cautious because of the bad and extremely slow support. SC took them over a year. FC and 688i was not much faster. I recommended that if there are things to patch, they would be well-advised to get these things, especially serious things, fixed within reasonable time-frame of let's say two patches, 2-3 months for each, before the initial spike in interest that follows a new release has faded out again.

THEY AGAIN FAILED IN THAT.

6. So, back then I talked to friends and colleagues and advertised the sim and described what it is. INTEREST WAS THERE, and not too little. The manual did not drive people away, but attracted them. THE BROKEN STATUS OF THE SIM IS WHAT KEPT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE AWAY. Even some long-year-board members here, that had displayed great enthusiasm during the times of SC, and were actively engaged in supporting it, ran out of patience and turned their backs on DW, and the board. Such a reputation is lethal if the sim in question already is a niche product. A niche product must pass the tests with flying colours in order to leave the niche, or even just survive in it's niche. If it does not pass the tests, it's fate is sealed. It gets stuck in it's hole and never will leave it again after the first attempt. That's how the market functions today. There is too much other tasty fish out in the sea.

7. A sub sim is not a flight sim. You cannot compare it's popularity to let's say F4. F4 was in a terrible status when it was released - but it also was a genre that simply outclasses the attraction of subsims, and it did not take them years to come up with patches and displays of efforts and willingness to improve it. That basic attraction was enough to get the patching and modding show running - for years. This level of customer's tolerance should not be expected with regard to subsims. You are a fine and hardcore community here. but that does not change the fact that you are few, and that your interest is not representative for the interest of the vast majority of players and simmers. Do not conclude on othery by your own example.

What I personally also found a bit too rich was a posting by a representative of Sonalysts, long time ago, over a year, complaining that there was too little support and enthusiasm on the board, and concluding that that poor support by the community maybe hampers sales numbers. Why should anyone buy the sim, when he comes to this place and sees the lacking community effort here?, it was indirectly complained. the status of the product and the reputation of Sonalysts of needing millenias to get things repaired of course had nothing to do with it. Support is not patching, but forum presence - this seemed to have been the implicit conclusion. Well, they were present in the forum, and very much so, I admit that. But with comments in a forum you can't reapir broken things. It's the patching that counts - not sweet words. - The man starting the thread later tried to rudder back a bit. But the damage already was done. In the following weeks several names that I knew since the times of SC said farewell to DW.

My conclusion: Sonalyst torpedoed themselves with this. They sunk their own boat, by bad seamanship. The idea was good, the execution (bugs, graphics) was mediocre, the support was lousy. In a short while it will be two years since release - and manoeuvring the subs still is a bad joke, if 1.03 is still the status. Truth is - after two years, not many people outside your hardcore community have any interest left in 1.04 that might be released, or might be released in a year, or never - who knows.

Two years for patching showstopping bugs? And complaining about people not buying it enough, then?

To them the low sales-numbers may be a phenomenon they do not understand. To me it is a logical consequence.

Got burned twice now. Will never get burned by Sonalyst again.

Just a short hop-in of mine, so don't try to debate with me. ;)

Bye,
Skybird

Excellent post Skybird and nice to see you back, if only briefly.SCS have built themselves a football that is a cube not a sphere.It is still playable but not as we all hoped.There are people on this board that could make this ungainly object a million times better but unfortunately the ball owner's attitude is that they know their product is not right but they don't really want it corrected for them.
I was looking at the Sonalysts website today and the gaming for entertainment side is only a very small part.The shareholders are not going to throw money at making an object look like a photograph especially for a niche product,which is why I feel that the wraps need to come off and SCS should allow the community to develop DW into a really good game for the benefit of the membership.
Nobody has asked what SCS are planning next.After the poor sales of DW I would imagine very little for the entertainment market.They will concentrate on stuff that makes them real money.

A friend...huh? Yeah right. :roll: Some departure there Skybird.:shifty:


At any rate, Sonalysts has achieved something that no other gamemaker has. They have rolled 7 different naval platforms into one sim. What other sim out there has allowed you to play as a nuclear submarine (3 different types), diesel submarine, naval surface ship, helicopter, maritime patrol aircraft....all in one sim? With a high level of fidelity (weapons and sensors) in each platform? Name one. Can't do it? That's what I thought. You can't. Only Sonalysts has made such a game. And done it to a very high fidelity. Especially in terms of sensor modelling, and platform specific weapons modelling. Gameplay in DW is incredible. I have been disgusted by a few attitudes displayed in regards to DW. It is a cut above the rest. The problem is that some people loaded it up not to play it, but to only specifically find what doesn't work, so they can come into this forum to complain about it. Whatever happened to playing a game for the "fun of it". I swear, some of you people would really enjoy DW if you weren't looking for reasons to hate it. How about loading it up to immerse yourself into an actual scenario, and having fun while challenging yourself to get results?

And I don't see a big problem with the graphics. I do think the 3-D ship models need updating, but Sonalysts have upgraded their graphics engine every single time they've made a new game. SH3 has excellent graphics and scenario immersion, yet there are issues with it. And guys over there have some criticism over it, yet they seem to be able to enjoy it. I enjoyed it (especially with the GW mod), but it is off my harddrive now. DW still remains.

And in regards to DW's sales, it is a niche market. Nevertheless, have you seen some of the reviews DW has gotten from multiple sources? DW has achieved very high marks from many reviewers. Go to the Dangerous Waters website and look for yourself. And one more thing, those that want added playables have known all along that this was dependant on sales. Have you personally (anybody here) tried to constructively work to help make DW better? Have you raised constructive points for improvement to the maker? Or are you just here to tell us how DW is a failure when many of us are still enjoying the game? :stare: Not a failure in any sense of the word to me.

I agree, the game is a rough diamond.
Thats why notwithstanding its rough edges its still on my hard drive and I still play it from time to time.

Nobody criticises just for the fun of it.
There are genuine problems with the game, some people consider them showstoppers, others like me consider them annoyances.
I was not looking for SH III graphics, I never said that DW should have the ultimate graphics engine or high end looking 3d models.
I was criticising the absence of something as fundamental in this day and age as 32 bit graphics.
Its since the late 1990's that ATI for instance doesn't even make graphics cards that support native 16 bit color.
Everything is done in 24-32 bit, so excuse me but when a game is published in freekin 2005 not having support for 24-32 bit graphics is a big let down.
Even freeware games, or fan made games have native support for 24-32 bit graphics.
I have an lcd, and although I don't use the 3d screen, let me tell you that the graphics to put it mildy is crap.
There is banding everywhere, and it makes the game a bit less enjoyable than it shoud be.

The problem is SCS used an outdated graphics engine with all its limitations.
Limitations that could have been acceptable 5-6 years ago but not anymore.
And to be precise I'm not talking about a far cry-doom 3- half life graphics engine.

Again, the game was marketed from the beginning to the niche market.
That was a mistake.
Selling only online was a mistake, poor visibility and advertising.
The fact the game made 3 steps forward (new platforms, new sonar model, multistation) and 2 steps backwards in respect to previous games (sub command for instance) was considered by the niche market a let down.

I mean in the end, part of DW failure to enter the general market is due to SCS fault.
There is no way around this.
And to be honest I have been promoting DW on an italian website since the game was published by battlefront.
Way before steam, and way before the retail release, and way before the game was even published in europe.
I introduced a lot of players to DW, the different platforms, the tactics, faq,etc...
I've kept the thread alive for over 2 years, and if this is not a labour of love I don't know what to say.
I like the game, its not perfect, and its not a crime to wish that things were done differently by SCS.

Well, I have never considered DW to be that buggy or unplayable. So the patches haven't been coming out as quick as otehr developers, hang on though most other developers are full time games makers.

SCS does this as a side line, primarily as a training aid for the US navy, I wonder if they have cancelled the order. Sub handling might have been a bit odd and I will admit in the last patch it was downright weird, but not unplayable.

Anyway I'm privy to stuff I can't really reveal but I have high hopes.

As for Lintons asseriont that SCS have no intention of fixing the things that need to be fixed even though they know what's wrong is way off the mark. Having had conversations with Jamie I am still 100% confident that he does want to fix the things and the rest of teh team too, but they have other stuff to do which is their core business. If they didn't want to bother they would have left it at patch 1.03, patch 1.04 is on its way. As for support and enthusiasm, there was plenty of it when the sim was released and still is. In fact I see it returning.

BTW Sky I thought you were leaving the forum ;)

When I made my comments, I wasn't referring to you goldorak. ;) I've seen your labors of love for DW. I'm more addressing those that seem to be here for the sole purposes of arrogantly telling us that DW is a failure and why we should hate it. Even though there are many of us who totally love this game. While there are a couple of things I would like to see different with DW, and hope for a 1.04 patch, the whole game is excellent IMHO. I just don't see the "show-stoppers". I still enjoy the game very much, and can easily immerse myself into a very enjoyable modern naval scenario using DW as the engine.

And I'm going to reiterate, nobody has made a game of similar characteristics as DW. Multiple playable naval platforms...all in one sim.

Yeah....what was all this drama about??? :roll:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=100154

This is fairly simple, guys. We cannot release the source-code to DW because there are many non-commercial customers who own the exclusive right to it as the basis of their simulations and analysis tools. If we were to release it, we would be in breach of contract with those customers and lose a great deal of business from it.

With that said, I do my VERY BEST to support the DW mod scene and truly hope to see a graphical modification of the same scope as SCX for this game. I will do everything in my power to support any project which makes DW better.

Indirectly complained.... in other words, that is how you interpretted it, Skybird? Because if you send me a link to the post I can actually DIRECTLY explain to you what I *actually* meant by that post and we can stop "speculating" on what you think I "indirectly" meant... :) I'm always attempting to improve on my communication skills (both written and verbal), so if I portrayed to you or to anyone else that I was somehow disappointed in the support of the DW community, I would like to correct such a misinterpretation... :know:

My assessment of DW's on-line/retail performance is that we sold it through Battlefront because we saw it for what it was, a very specific, high-fidelity, niche product. What we did wrong, was we based assumptions of the size the hardcore naval sim community on an estimated fraction of the sales of Sub Command. That was a mistake... EA was a huge advantage for Sub Command, and their extensive penetration into the retail channels cannot be overstated. EA placed Sub Command in dozens of retailers that may not have placed orders for the product had it not been for the fact that EA was our publisher. Obviously, if your product is not in the retailers, it cannot be purchased... seems simple, right?

That is what SH3 and UbiSoft did well. The game was excellent, the marketing was solid, and EVERY retailer wanted a piece of it. UbiSoft is a "AAA" publisher (just as EA was for us) and their retail presence along with a very high quality product gave SH3 a very good chance to succeed.

And just so that I am not "indirectly" misunderstood... :) I love this community, and the efforts created from it motivate our team to continue working on DW, the v1.04 patch, and beyond.

If there is any news for me to disclose, I promise you all that I will do so. :yep:

I also have a "see I told you so" view on this topic.... I have always been a proponent of being able to create and/or drive new platforms in any game/sim, especially this one. When I first heard that SCS was forbidding this and making any expansion packs dependent on sales, I knew the "boat was sunk" as it were. I thought then and still think now that this was/is a crappy policy. Jamie, please tell me that your aforementioned contract with non-commercial entities is the reason for this - otherwise there's no excuse. Dis-allowing new driveables I think is also a factor in the games lack of success, albeit a lower-order one. I would have loved to have seen what people like Jsteed could have done with DW.

Jamie has already explained many times the reason for the non modding policy of DW.
There is nothing more to add to this particular issue.

Well Goldorak sorry I don't remember offhand. Unfortunately my life is not totally comprised of DW....:cry: But you can't argue that the issue is helping matters with respect to interest in the product.

To be honest I don't think that modding would resolve the low sales of DW.
Modding is a plus, that caters to the hard core gamers, but the average player that buys DW couldn't care less about using an arleigh burke instead of a frigate or a ticonderoga cruiser.

The contracts are with the US DoD, I think there is some stuff in the source code which is DoD specific and which is maybe deactivated for the retail release.

It's not just about "favorite" platforms. New playables would allow the game to expand to cover a greater battlespace to include new scenarios and new tactical problems. Not being able to expand is a HUGE hit on the quality of the game.

Falcon 4--another high-realism sim geared towards a niche market--had to deal with a lot of bugs when it was owned by MicroProse, but extensive modding was around and the community was able to improve on and expand the game dramatically. A lot of the modding work involved new flight models and cockpits for new player-controlled aircraft. They kept it alive for years and eventually produced a product far superior to anything MP was able or willing to do. I strongly doubt that any version of F4 would be popular today if not for the efforts of the modding community.

Speaking only in terms of the interest in the quality of the product, extensive modding is crucial to picking up the slack when the producing company does not have the reasources to fully develop the game. Obviously, for other business interests, that can't happen here, but it does hurt. A lot.

Yes, but a lor of the work done on F4 was bugfixing (especially after the leak) and extra features. Extra planes? I'm not sure it was so important, as many people went to Allied Force even though it is less mod-friendly.

More significant may be that F4 simply doesn't have a competitor. Jane's F/A-18 does well for realism (especially compared to pre-leak F4), but lacks a dynamic campaign. LOMAC has more flyables, but is generally considered behind in realism.


For the graphics, I think DW is more than good enough (I think Fast Attack was good enough for subs, destroyer demands a bit more of course). Of course, 32-bit would be nice to avoid banding. The more annoying things are the gameplay bugs (dipping sonar gives incorrect bearings, weird sub movement and slow depth changes, mines not working right, DEMON/narrowband issue,... Some of that may be partially fixed by user mods, others will require patching.

I am sure that Jamie and the team are very interested in making this the best game ever, but it is the people that hold the corporate purse strings that will decide. what will happen.I am sure that having looked at their sales and the investment needed to bring it to where we wish, the money is better spent elsewhere within the scs group.Supporting a small group of gamers does not pay the bills
The gaming side is a very small part of the company and I would be surprised if we see a new game from scs in the near future.If I was the ceo of scs I would allow the community to mod the graphics.I am sure that the non-commercial customer to which Jamie refers would not mind that.As others have said before the look of the game is what attracts most gamers, not the quality of the sim engine.The current graphics (3d) are poor.I looked last night at some of the scx models that have been produced-they are excellent compared to some of the Dw ones especially my t-boat!
Jamie I really wish that whoever runs your company lets you have a budget to fix all the bugs and allow this game to achieve its full potential but I know that in a corporate world everything has to be zero cost/maximum profit!
PS how long does your other customer hold proprietry rights for on the software??