Well this is a forum to express yourself, so give it a try.

My point is that some competition would be good for the subsim community, but if you want to make the case that we are better off living with Ubsiofts dominance of the subsim genre - be my guest...

Sorry, I apologize for the short, snotty remark :timeout: I tired to ninja edit it and add a reply to you that was more in the spirit of the Subsim forums, but you replied too quick :D

So, please ignore that and read my edited comments :salute:

It would be cool if Sid Meier would do an updated version of Silent Service.:up: But on a side note, Neal is correct about a smaller group putting out a big name game, unless they have the capital (which I highly doubt:dead:) to hire good programming, artistic talent, QA, marketing, to get it to market in a timely manner:doh:. Plus a lot of the publishers are corrupt, unethical sheissters:nope:.

Im not buying the argument that SH series is too big for a small developer.

Granted...the engine itself is what costs BIG $$$ to make. And Ubistank isnt about to release even the SH III engine.

But if modders like the GWX/RUB/RFB can make such wonderful mods that in essance redifine the game.... then I dont see why the Devs couldnt find funding to remake a new series.

Sid has lost it.. compare railroads to railroad tycoon :nope:

Neal,

"There are excellent smaller developers out there, but I doubt very much any of them can make an AAA title like Silent Hunter that will match our expectations. Even before Ubisoft took over the SH series, there has only been one game that rose to the level of SH: Aces of the Deep. And Sierra, even with the crack Dynamix dev team ready to make a sequel, decided it was not profitable. They decided it was not profitable."

Triple A? I dont think any SH title (unmodded) could be called that except for maybe SH3 (introducing the dynamic campaign). Of course that is a matter of opinion.

I reckon the major appeal of SH games since SH3 has been the dynamic campaign. Just like the major feature of F4 was that it boasted one of the first realtime complex dynamic campaigns for sim enthusiasts.

Why are these two games so popular amongst sim fans? Because they have *dynamic campaigns*. I know i keep saying it over and over but i think its improitant to grasp what makes SH popular regardless of the bugs, and broken implementation of major aspects of the game.

I dont buy the excuses that a sub game is not profitable and the only reason Ubi can do it because they just recycle most components from the previous Sh games.

Each release can bag anywhere between $10m-$20million gross on a 200k-400k sold at $50 per copy.

A dev team of 25 artists/programmers working for 2 and half years cannot produce that game and make a profit?

When corps talk about profitability they often have very inflated ideas about RTO, especially when they compare that title next to say a much more populist title like Assasins Creed.

I take what those companies say about profitability with a large grain of salt.

"Anything is possible, I suppose. But there is a lot more evidence that a game as good as SH3/SH4 can only be created by a large publisher like Ubisoft. And with a weak SH5, if anyone was going to try to take that market over, now would be the time. I haven't heard anything at all that remotely sounds like this will happen. EA is making a major sub game, but it will be like Battlestations: Midway, and it's X-box all the way, baby."

Whether in a year or two or a decade, there will be other sub sims and they wont always be made by Ubisoft.

Not so sure about that... this from Sid's Keynote speech at this years GDC

" We want you to feel good about yourself while you're playing. This went off the tracks with Flight Simulators: early on they were accessible and easy to play. Then we got to every iteration where they went more complex, more realistic.. and pretty soon the player went from I'm Good to I'm Confused. My plane is falling out of the sky. The fun went out of it. Keep your player feeling good about themselves."

Add to the fact that SH4 sold a lot less copies in the US than SHIII and you have to question the viability of a Pacific theatre subsim.

Sonarman,
With regards to the viability of a Pacific War subsim, it is perfectly viable.

However, your comparison of SHIII sales and SHIV sales is leaves out one very important item, MARKETING!

When Silent Hunter III was released, I was able to go to my local game store a pick up a copy the day of release. Now, when SHIV was released, they had not even ordered one copy in, so I traveled to another game store, same thing, no copies on the shelves. I must have gone to 10 different stores in a 35 mile radius, not one copy had been ordered from any of them. Most managers replied that they didn't even know the game was coming out. So, I went back to the first store and ordered a copy.

To sell, games, you must also market them properly, and that just wasn't done by UBI here in the US. It was as if they wanted the game to fail, or they knew it was a niche market, even though they claimed it was for the masses, and completely cut the marketing budget for SHIV.

Your making the same false assumption that UBI is making.

SH4 sold less than SH3 due to the fact that it was released with EVEN more bugs then SH3. Example:

1) Patrol Missions that repeated over and over and over (I almost went thru the whole war getting the same patrol assignment).

2) Sub on rails that ruined immersiveness

3) "ghost" figures with bugged fog display.

4) Eyes missing from crewmen (ruined immersivness)

5) AI that was as dumb and blind as a box of rocks (escorts wouldnt chase or DC me unless I stayed surfaced until within a few hundred meters).

This is just to name a few. And even after we PAID for a final patch, which is what we did with bug fixes included ONLY if you bought the Uboat expansion, it was STILL bugged.

I think if the Devs could have concentrated on an improved SH4 (90% MINOR bug free), using the SH4 engine with tweaks....SH5 would have sold like gangbusters.

Yes, I think there is a lot of truth in both your arguments, the bottom line is that since SH3 Ubi seems to have cut both the development & marketing budgets for the series. How much has it hurt sales? only they truly know that. What a tragedy to have an award winning and criticaly acclaimed title like SH3 which was given a proper budget and even had its dev time extended to include a dynamic campaign then to cut the legs off the series. They really need someone who can bang the table at production meetings and fight their corner for the future of the series as we know it.

It makes you wonder also what the new mobile phone and Ipod versions will do to the brand image, doesnt' seem like a very smart move to me, the series very identity is being eroded, what is it a top down action game a 3d arcade game or a serious simulation?

I must also say that bricks and mortar retailers also seem to be out to kill off PC gaming entirely, I think they have suffered massively in sales terms during the credit crunch. The UKs largest retailer GAME/Gamestation which had a virtual monopoly in the UK has recently closed 44 stores and their once extensive displays of PC titles have been slashed to the bare minimum of stock. Whilst the twice as expensive/profitable console titles festoon the walls.

Actually, looking at Storm of War with its amazing graphics I couldn't help wondering.... Why shouldn't Oleg use his 3d engine for a sub sim?

1. Spherical world? Done
2. Weather? Done
3. Shores of France and Britain? Done
4. The ENTIRE air layer? Done

Plus they have the ship models and the Sub already made.
I wouldn't mind having a complete WW2 experience in Storm of War with interdependent theaters and sims:
- planes
- subs
- surface craft
- tanks
- even shooters over huge terrain with full city battles

Can you imagine the multiplayer? I know that WW2 Online has already been done but this could be a pseudo singleplayer/multiplayer experience. Plus, we'll soon get full HD head displays.. must think to the future. One humongous database of WW2 held by one company would be a great asset. You get the base files for free then start buying theaters, sims, and so on.
I don't care if it comes to take 200GB of my space :yeah:

Adding control of naval and ground units to the SOW engine has already been mooted by Oleg and was at one point actually stated to be in development, (I'll try and dig up the reference on that one*).

You could say exactly the same thing about Ubi and a surface sim by the way, almost everything is there already. Ubi would be much better putting time into that rather than diluting the brand with Iphone/mobile arcade games.


*UPDATE
Here is that quote...

"AviaForum: Is it possible to organize combined server for many players?

Oleg Maddox: New engine allows to organize combined area for many players. If we get support from the publisher, we are ready to release MMO simulator based on BOB, where not only planes will be controlled by the players, but also tanks, cars, vessels, submarines, basically all elements of warfare that are present in the sim."

That would be brilliant, and i think it will be the future of sim gaming.

Uh, that would be a dream come true. I'd love to give you "vets" a hard time with 24/7 air patrols. :03:
I'm also very anxious about the upcoming BoB, I hope it won't be destroyed by any DRM stuff.

Oleg uses 1C (not UBSuck anymore for the US edition), and dosent like DRM, so Im sure its no worry...