Speaking about real deal, I noticed on the latest in-game footage that we could “still” see the bearing in the periscope view.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that a real U-boat captain had to take his eye out of the periscope, look above and notice the bearing.

Personally, I would really like this feature to be introduced so we could have a real periscope view.

Quote from the opening post:

This isn't about what you want to see in SH5, or even how you would like to play it in the future.

OK it's not about SH5, so why did he started this thread in the SH5 forum???

Don't worry, you can say anything you want. My only request was to vote independetly of your expectations of SH5.

I've said a loong time ago (here http://subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=151937) that the perfect interface for the periscope should only consist of a viewfinder, the marks and a small dial showing your orientation. To get the real bearing you'd need to zoom back to the 3d periscope camera and look above (just as you said). The 3D periscope object should also house all the buttons and levers required to use it (keybinded of course). A 3d AOBF would also be cool. But all of this requres an intelligent system of cameras, mouse control and focusing objects.

The reason I posted it on the SH5 section, in the same day we saw the gamey interface, was so that we all have a clear picture of how the community plays SH (game, sim, challenge, immersion). As I said, I don't care about difficulty settings or how many mods you use, but about each player's level and type of involvement. Why would this help?

Ubi needs to sell this game. If they make it too tough, it will scare away customers. But viewing some comments on the trailers, I've seen things like "Looks nice and simple but I'm not sure I want to be a submariner yet". The point is, you can't turn a niche game into a mainstream one. You can't make a World of Warcraft or Halo player switch to a forklift simulator. No chance! Some people say "a good and realistic game sells". Oh really? How many still play Richard Burns Rally instead of Dirt? People want chabang and kabong, there's no denying it. Subs are not chabang and will never be... :haha:. But sub games have a special formula that can draw a huge number of people BECAUSE they are different from everything else. BECAUSE they are hard.

To be honest I didn't expect so many people to vote for 3 and 4. I'm really curious how the poll will look like a month from now. Sure, we're a community interested in the game, in realism and mods. But still, the current numbers really took me by surprise. SH3 and SH4 must've done something right if 60% of current voters were able to immerse themselves so well in the game.

Players like these are much more sensible to changes and much more critic. Just look how many people play SH3 instead of SH4. If SH5 is to be a worthy successor, it must retain that special something. Making the game more hardcore and immersive might actually drawn more players than making it more friendly and chabang. So far, the interface points to chabang, and considering how well received some features were (fps camera, crew), it might be a historical blunder to miss the perfect formula. Think about it, the most immersive sim ever, in what is easily the most romantic and challenging type of simulation.
I guess we'll see.

Sample bias. The people who were unable to immerse themselves or only played the game at the most casual level are the least likely to post here.

4: Real Deal.

Don't like shoot-em-up games.
I like to be forced to think logicaly. and realisticly.
No instant kills. I have to earn it!
I ignore "give me" targets (F.eks. English merchant off Norge/Norway in 1943)

My computer is not realy set up for games as there were none of interest to me, until I found the SH3 sim. It's the only one on my machine.

I've already ordered SH5, but actual installation will have to wait for me to upgrade my machine. It can barely handle SH3, and I've never used External or Free View. That being said, I'm not much of an Eye Candy fan.

Do you like video games?: No.
Do you like SH3?: No. I love it!

I hope this was helpful, and not too long-winded.

Interesting, thanks!

I didn't vote because I don't see one for "schizoid". :|\\

I have the hardest time with the external view - I sink a carrier I want to watch it, but then it's SO hard not to use the external view to cheat. Play at 100% realism and your situational awareness is limited to sonar and optics at periscope depth and above, sonar only when you're trying to avoid depth charges, it's all too easy to focus on one target and not see or hear the tin can coming from the other direction. No, don't switch to external view and look around that's cheating ahhhhh rats I can't help it.

The damage model itself is problematic, i LIKE a good challenge but hopeless nonsense like losing the rudder or having bulkheads so badly damaged they can't be fixed in time no matter what you do is only good for masochists who like to watch the death scenes. And WHAT is with the pressure model? I'm 50 feet below test depth and everything is okay, but every minute you spend below test depth generates some kind of weird stress damage? Any of the devs ever heard of equilibrium? If the test depth is 250 and i make it down to 400 without any valves busting loose I SHOULD be able to stay there without the STABLE pressure causing damage.

I'm currently playing all real except external view, and I hacked the fuel to increase the range by 25% (they DID use some of the external ballast tanks to hold extra fuel for increased range) and the main trouble with not having the map update is them lubbers on the bridge and sonar watch. SONAR CONTACT SONAR CONTACT SONAR CONTACT SONAR CONTACT SONAR CONTACT huh? No, that's not four new ones, that's the same one you keep trying to time accelerate while doing the end around. SHIP SPOTTED SHIP SPOTTED SHIP SPOTTED SHIP SPOTTED SHIP SPOTTED SHIP SPOTTED would you prefer if it was striped? Where away, scurvy dog, got a bearing? And if it's the same one you keep losing sight of and reporting it as if it were something new each time you see it again I'll replace your binoculars with a toilet brush and make you permanent head cleaner. WE'RE TAKING DAMAGE SIR HULL DESTROYED SIR hold the phone, did I sleep through the part where you reported that the wing escort turned toward us and bent on 38 knots? Don't you think it might be IMPORTANT to report stuff like that after reporting sighting that wing escort for the umpteenth time? If he's still weaving back and forth on his station while we're running ahead that's considered good, if he suddenly turns toward us with a bone in his teeth, I'd prefer to hear about that BEFORE he opens fire.

Didn't mean to go off on a rant, but for me playing ultra realism means I play with a halfway intelligent crew, I can't even get these mutinous dogs to flood down to decks awash without diving to periscope depth then coming back up, and when I tell the lazy lubbers I want 27 feet they say 27, 25, 23, 22 feet, it's all the same. :88)

I voted real deal as defined.
I'm never going to play a 1X patrol.

I use the cam for the eye candy only never for tactical purposes. It took some time to learn this but that is how I play. Being in the sonar room and nav. map ducking DCs is real. Knowing you have targets but not what they are till you are ready for the attack is real.

Map contacts off, not real you have a plotting crew for that.
Map contacts on, not real, too much information that was not available to the captain, mostly range being right on. I choose on, more realistic for me but I sure wish that there was something in between. There is a good case to be made for contacts off and I do play that way sometimes.
What Sniper says, all that is not realistic. You have a crew to do that.

For me it's captains responsibility to make the tactical decisions and leave the details to his crew. Attack what you can when you can and get the boat home in one piece. How you do that is up to each individual.

Magic

I'll take REALISM over DIFFICULTY any day. :up:


Voted Real Deal, now just have my fingers crossed.

Oh, "Real Deal" all the way.

Comes from my background of doing Historical Reenactments and Living History events. The more real the better.

Test Dive on leaving port, drills, alarm drills, more drills, daily trim dive, the right grammaphone tunes, etc...

@ Sniper and Magic: You guys sound just like me. I said my piece earlier about manual targeting, so I won't again, but your complaints and wishes for the way the Attack Map works are mine as well.

But there may be a solution. In SH3 I use the Assisted Plotting Mod. It makes it so nothing at all in the way of shipping appears on the map. But if you spot something it appears on the map, but only as a small dotted circle and then only when your cursor passes over it, and even then all it says is "Unknown". If you put your UZO or periscope on it and properly ID it, or have the WE do it, clicking on it now shows the information correctly (or incorrectly if you got it wrong). Other ships on the map still show up as "Unknown", as you can only do it one ship at a time.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/down...o=file&id=1328

There was one made for SH4 as well, but every time I've tried to use it I get a crash.

Sorry for the diversion, but I wanted to answer these complaints directly.

My answer was Option 3 - for the following reason.

Regardless of how I want to play (and I alternate between ridiculously easy and as hard as it gets based on mood) - Option 3 is the only one that mentioned CHOICES of how to play. Its not up to me to say how someone else should play - and I LIKE Options.

Voted option 3.

I try to play as realistically as possible and throw in a little role playing but I just don't like the map contacts options and I like eye candy, so I have external views turned on.
:)