If you are going to talk ****, you had better learn to like the taste.

Wait. so dick is fine, while shyte is not?

Dude. Lighten up. Or have a few more drinks.
:D
You posted in GT. It's open Game here.
(Well, it seems to be most times)

Not really. I would suggest you take the time to read Subsim's rules on language.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/faq...._item_language

Also, you seem to be growing a little defensive. A couple of people disagreeing with you isn't a good reason to start being rude, and that first comment sounds a little like a threat.

Guys, I'm calm and im here to have fun. And my mother taught me vulgarity.
But yea back to topic.

I think I remember that, but my parents were highly security conscious back then so no online interactions.

I was part owner of an ISP back in the mid 90's
We ran something like 6 or 8 Game Servers back then.

It seems a bit ambitious to me. In my thinking the more you add the more difficult it is for the whole to be stable and for the parts to appeal to different players. Then again I only play certain things because I like the machinery - specifically ships and planes. I don't see how something that big and varied can appeal to the hard-core machinery buff like me.

I admit my tastes are limited. I'm probably also older than your parents. :dead:

This could be another reason to sell the separate divisions as DLC.
If we were to do this to the standard expected by long term fans simulations then each of these would be enough to be its own stand alone game.

Imagine if you will, WWII Ground combat, to the standard of a Game such as Arma 3.

You would start with ground combat (AKA Army). This version would include both Infantry and Merchandised armor, It would also include the basic engineer functionality. Release that as the Primary part of the game, the only one required for all other DLC.

So instead of buying Call of duty, Call of duty black ops, Call of duty Modern Warfare (not much of a cod fan but best example I can think of.) You would buy DlC's which by all rights should be stand alone games. So in the end you would have The Base Game with 3 dlcs, then the progression to the Cold war where you would kick off as the son of your original player. Kinda like the end of SPOILERS red dead redemption.

The next DLC which would not be required would be the Marine DLC which focuses on advanced weapons and tactics. IE Bi-pod, advanced explosives, etc. This DLC would also include basic water craft, such as rafts and jet ski

After that would be the Naval DLC this would This would give you full simulated naval combat including missions relating to the Marines and Army if they are activated.

The Last would be the Aviation DLC this would allow you control of aircraft, and would unlock missions with the navy, and army when those DLCs are enabled. It would also give you a few unlocks such as aircraft carriers with the Naval DLC.

Now before you start complaining about the memory issues I have an idea for that. So everything has a mission, everything has a job; and a set goal.
With that, you can calculate where a force needs to be when it needs to be their, and how long it will take. This will work for both historical battles, by just entering in basic details via who won, and who lost. And make a radio broadcast with historical data. And Alternate history with filler content.

However when you are in an area you have the ability to effect the outcome.
Say if you win the Battle of Midway as the Japanese then we just need a few fiction writers to do their dirty work, add in a few stats such as kills deaths etc. And their you go, not much different from what the show deadliest warrior does.

This would have 2 pro's that I can see. It would allow the player to influence the world without everything actually happening in real time. By defeating a troop transport all the computer needs to do is subtract the amount of men, supplies and munitions from the battle, outweigh the pro's and con's much like Deadliest warrior does. Without the intense memory needed to play out a battle in real time. Kinda like Auto-resolving combat in Rome 2 total war.

This way this Game, would turn in to a massive program with every DLC adding to the story.
Now that I think of this, its kinda the perfect scam...
The only problem I see is people resenting the fact that they need to buy DLC to finish the story... However this would be the easiest way to let the consumer decide how involved he wants to be, how much he wants to spend. And with the Cold war DLCs how many of the core DLCs would be required to be bought. Would we need the core game DLC to be installed to have a full cold war experience? And would the cold war dlc just be a re-skin of existing craft. I would prefer a complete stand alone DLC bundle for the cold war; but that would hardly be cost effective. And now on a side note, if the player wants to skip the WWII experience will he need to own
all the core dlc to play the cold war?

BTW my parents are both 70+ lol.

Who is this 'we' that is consistently referred to?

I think everyone has their dream game or sim that they would love to be seen made, but reality and its constrictions often get in the way to scupper said dreams.

My advice would be to talk amongst the people down in the 'Indie subsim' section to get an idea of what struggles they've faced and wisdom they have to share, and then consider the scope of your project and then, and only then, consider finding a team and financial backing.

Its a lot to download when you are on a data plan, when i bought wolfenstein the new order i had to wait 3 months to play it because i only get 15gb per month and their was a 30gb patch before i could play it, so i think the more i have to download its not really worth it.

wolfenstein the new order = $75.00
30gb of data =$210.00

One could use the approach that DCS (Digital Combat Simulator) takes. It started with just (very realistic) aircraft and is expanding into land based operations as well. All in DLCs. You can get the world for free (with two aircraft) and just buy the stuff you like. There are several independent teams working on their projects and merge them with the game world. I'm not exactly a big fan of this approach however as this means that there is a lack of focus on one scenario which has left us (for now) with a lot of different aircraft which can't really interact with each other in any historic context (for example there are a few aircraft from the Vietnam era but not enough for a realistic scenario, there also is no Vietnam map or ground units...same goes for WWII... and Korea....everybody builds his pet project whether it fits to the already existing content or not). This means that a lot of units don't see much use until much later when matching content has been created to make a meaningful campaign with them. The game has also been in development for ages.

This makes sense, the only reason why I say that the army dlc should be the first part of the game is because this would allow US (eff off) to define how a character moves, and work on textures. It would have the basics, then you can choose what you want based off the advanced if you want to go off of the navy, maybe the air force. This would allow you to choose your own path through history.

Yes the air force DLC would unlock more missions for the Navy DLC, and even a new tier of controllable ships but it would not limit your personal world in any way if you chose not to download it.

I'm curious if theses vesicles where to rupture dose cell then die?:hmmm:

What sort of graphics engine would this proposed project run on? 2D or 3D?
What fund-raising system would be in place to arrange funds to move forward with such a project?
Who would be the leader of the project?

Those are just three questions off the top of my head, and that's before we get into things such as hiring people and salaries.

This thread reminds me a fair bit of one that we had over in the General Games forum a while ago...let me see if I can find it...

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=195228

Here.