I think MMOs are a good way to ruin great games.

Just my two cents ;)

ParaB has improved in "telling it like it is (100)!" :lol:

WW2 Online (Battleground Europe now) does have some unique stuff with it, but naval part is not very well done. Everything else is though, would encourage everyone to try it. I will reactivate it again when I have more time.

Anyway, the game "Navy Field" with SH4/5 graphics is what I am looking for.
A massively multiplayer online tactics simulation game based upon WW2 of course, with all 4 major factions involved. Start out with your Frigate and work your way to the big Battleships and Carriers. And of course special job's that a Destroyer has, torpedo boats maybe and submarines, light/heavy cruisers etc.

The game system that Navy Field has now doesn't really give you the "feel" of such a game though, and would have to see some changes.

But this type of game (which I tried to my best effort to describe here, maybe not easy to tell but :p), is what I am essentially looking for. I would subscribe even before it launched!

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I'm not sure why everyone seems to think I'm suggesting "WoW with submarines".

It seems to be where this thread is getting derailed, and I never implied (or want) any such thing - I said so specifically in an earlier post.

All I'm looking for is Sh3/Sh4 with a more expansive multiplayer component - expansive enough to be considered 'massive'. No 'grinding', indeed no levelling at ALL (who said levelling was a requirement of an MMO? How did that even come UP in this conversation?)

Again, we are not talking about changing the foundation of the game to try and target a 6 million+ install base. Nobody wants that. The idea is to just take what is already IN Sh3/Sh4, and just add onto the multiplayer. Ideally, we'd hit 50% of the target audience that ALREADY BOUGHT Sh3/Sh4. No more than that is needed, as each individual copy of any MMO title sold represents many times greater profitability to a company that individual copies of single-player/offline games.

IE., in a cost-benefit analysis of MMOs vs 'offline' games, you don't need to sell MORE copies to make the MMO more profitable, as each copy has much higher value over time. You only need to sell a significant fraction of the number that you would have sold anyway. An MMO is a license to print money for most companies (monthly fees, from every subscriber, for EVERY MONTH they play). What WE get out of it is a much more massive game, interaction with thousands of people playing at the same time, and more active, continued development than the half dozen patches we can at most optimistically expect of SP games.

Beautiful ! Complete with stupid typos ! Hilarious....

Now let me get a mop and clean up the soda all over the place.

No MMO because you'd lose more than half your sales. This is a series that appeals to SP people with a little MP thrown in for those who like it now and then. If MP was the main focus of SH4 I wouldnt have bought it because I hate MP.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I do play wow, thats my curse in life. But I can imagine the reknown sellers now:yep:

No, I am not sure an SH3+4 mmo would work, in fact I am sure it wouldn't. Then again, I cant see how WW2 online would work, and it obviously does...I would be tempted I guess but I would need a free trial first:p

I smell a fellow WoWer.

Your post brought back memories.... bad ones

I can just imagine Pearl chat being like barrens chat (shudder)

I am taking a much deserved break from not only wow but the wow forums.

The company here is much better :)

how about a multiplayer game where you play the officers and Petty officers in the same sub? A sub where EVERYTHING is done manually. Make it a true submarine simulator.

Everything manual torp loading, nav, trim, weapon, radar, sonar all simulated as realistically as possible.

Just a whacky idea

Yep I can just see it. A line appearing at the foot of the screen every 3 mins as in BF2142 "13 more votes needed to kick commander Parker"

Maybe, but, surely, you realize that even with half the players lost, the game would still be a WINDFALL for the publisher. Each of the ones they keep, after all, nets them 4 times the profit of the gamer they lost...each year

I dunno about others, but one reason i play SubSims (apart from an unhealthy fixation with diesal boats and the history about them) is because its's NOT an MMO.

I can pause the game, i can quit when i want, go afk when i want, do what i want, be what i want, and nothing i do has to be decided upon by committee about whats best for the group or guild.

And how is that different in an MMO? Or, more specifically, this hypothetical MMO (and I would agree, as proposed, it's closer to Planetside that most others...but not really very close at all).

If you don't feel like joining with a wolfpack, and just want to patrol solo...you can do that. A wolfpack gets you better odds late-war against larger and better defended convoys, but if you want to try to solo it...nothing is stopping you. On the other hand, when you DO want to do a patrol with a wolfpack, you've got a group of people you are friends with from the board (or whatever) to go hunting with. Or can simply ad-hoc it with a group of people in port. I mean, I hate to point out the lame MMO connection, but a few "LFS, convoy hunting in Arctic Ocean" can get you a group to game with impromptu, and you can still solo or game with your regular flotilla when the situation suits.

No, because not every series is as sucessful as WoW. Frankly I see an MMO sub sim with subscription starting of with a small base that barely covers the servers and only gets smaller. An MMO would limit the modders too. No, I know its hard for MMO fanatics to believe but MMOs are not the end-all-be-all of games.