But without the multiplayer, maybe some people wouldn't have bought it.
Some just prefer the single, others the multi, and some others both. And it's possible to make everybody happy. How? By making a great single-player campaign, and an exciting multiplayer mode. And how can be the multiplayer mode the most exciting? By making it possible to have human players in both the Sub and the Destroyer side. There should be the possibility to choose. That's how most communities played SH2/DC, and was a success.

Cheers :rock:

Actually, WWII submarine simulations are the FPS of the naval warfare genre. That is, they outsell their counterparts, like modern naval sims, greatly. By simulation standards, SH3 was a blockbuster.

I dunno...

I'm not sure if I believe that online multiplayer will enhance/save the sales numbers of SHIV. As someone posted earlier, only diehard-naval-sim-freaks will buy this type of game, and a true diehard-naval-sim-freak will buy SHIV regardless of online multiplayer or not.

On the other hand, your casual Counter-Strike-FPS player will not even bother to take a gander at SHIV, even if Ubi decided to go all out on the multiplayer aspect. I can use all of my real-life friends as an example. I know over 10 people that play CS all the time, and they'd never try SH3, even if it had the most kick-ass multiplayer on Earth. To the general public, "submarines are boring" no matter how you slice it. Multiplayer is not going to save SHIV... I agree that it will make you guys happy if Ubi decides to go for it... But the overall sales for Ubi aren't going to change dramatically, one way or the other.



And yes, I agree with this. For all naval combat games, SH3 was definately a blockbuster. Though that doesn't say very much... Even a half-baked FPS would kicks SH3's butt.

I agree on those CS players! I once played the Rome: Total War and I was just about to attack a fortified city. The screen was full of hundreds and hundreds of soldiers in 'Testudo' formation advancing towards the city as the defenders poured their arrows and hot oil on our necks. And believe me, that was the most beautiful scene I`ve ever seen in a single game I`ve played.

Then my friend asked: "So, what´s so good about this game??? Those stupid a**holes just march towards and let the enemy kill them!? What´s the point!!?? This is just stupid!!"

I swear, I almost punched him. :)

:hmm: Then I'm not so of a freak as I thought. :lol: :P

The multiplayer may not save the game, but it will make more people happy. :D

Cheers :rock:

It depends on the game, I think. Simulator games of SH's kind just aren't made for MP, ask you me. Although an MP career option would be nice - imagine carrying out a patrol with a buddy, returning, saving the game, joining up again tomorrow for a second patrol...

Despite the fact that humans in general as smarter and more innovative than bots, there's the fact that realism and immersion often goes out the window once you add MP. I mean, how many Tommies bunny-jumped in World War II? Bots may be dumb as rocks, but they at least don't pretend to be on pogo-sticks :nope: .

I'll add my 2 cents worth here. As an ex-DD sonarman, I've always played subsims going back to Red Storm Rising. When SH2/DC came out, I bought and played both games offline. When I started to play online, I wound up playing DD 99.9% of the time. This was usually because there were so few players who had DC I could only get a game as a DD. Add to this I was playing on a 56k dialup modem first with the UBI game engine then with messerwetzer, it would take 2 hours to set up a game and then I would drop after 10-15 minutes. Also, though I laud DC for it's use of various ship stations for realism during SP, it actually proved to be a detriment for MP play switching from CIC to Sonar to depth charges to radar and gunfire director. Add to that the DC bug which blocked active sonar every other time you went to the sonar station, it was just too complicated for the average gamer. Even an real-life experienced hand like me found it maddening at times.

I contrast this with my experiences playing Red Baron 3D as an RFC 101 Blackadder. I participated in 3 World league tournaments as well as a couple of Great War tournaments with 150-200 players online in the games.

Any MP option for sub vs surface must strive for simplicity. DCs shortcoming was that, because DDs were multi-role, it strived to be all things to all people and it proved detrimental to online games. In this respect, any DC2 should probably be aimed at ASW. The problem with that idea is the fact that the Pacific Theatre was primarily a multi-role mission area for DDs. Other than USS England, I would be hard pressed to remember an ASW hunter-killer group operating in the Pacific.

While I will indoubtedly by either or both SH4/DC2, I doubt if we'll see another DD sim for the reasons above.

Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

I'm sure, my "speech" is for majority of surface vessel players. We were given small promise that Ubisoft will work over DC2, all depends how SH III will deal on market. I think SH III was one of bigger and most important products in all these years. SH2 became so popular after DC was on sale. Then SubClub with its flotillas/desrons was full of players ready to battle. We had a lot of fun while fighting around merchant ships. You preffer offline play ? Your choice, but You dont speak for majority, You speak for yourself only. Its because You probably never had alive DD skiper above Your sewer pipe. AI ? You can trick it like a child, its simply and easy, and then every SH III guy would say "damn i am good". But for sure You haven't tried Your tricks with real player. Overall Destroyer Command it wasnt game about escorting convoys and ASW tactics only. To be good in DC first we had to understand many battle-stations as it was tottaly new idea. When i knew DC, depth charging was one of easiest tasks in battle. Try to fight against few Ju-87's diving on Your deck, almost impossible to avoide the bombs. This was game about surface vessels tasks during the WW2, not about boring u-boot chasing. Give me one more time some battle-cruiser like mighty Schranhorst and let me make my crusade against allied convoys. This was a sim with many many more possibilities than ASW only. Its sad to read such opinions, especially beacuse surface vessels players are not small part of subsim community.

There is possible to play SH III as surface vessel player but to have DC2 it would be necessary to unite many people and work over modding SHIII to change it into DC2.

This disagreement is easily solved: http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/viewtopi...=434481#434481

Rather than say what the community thinks, let us see what they think.

Well, at the time of this post, 31 members have voted and expressed a preferance for single play by 20-11, nearly a 2-1 margin. Given demographic data reflecting that only a small number of SubSim Forum Members are actually active members of a VF or other online club, it appears that a wider polling sample would likely drive those numbers further into the favor of single play.

Now we know who speaks for the majority.

There is almost 14 000 totally registered users at this forum. The group of 31 persons is not representative group to talk for all.

Otherwise

You have to accept that in such proportions as example:
if 200 thousands ppl preffer single player
then 110 thousands preffer multiplayer.

You can say only 110 thousands or this number of ppl is really impresive and might is worth give them for multi. Because they are still our customers.

so true, friend of mine in my BF2 clan saw me playing SH3 on xfire daily for hours on end, he asked me about it. after i described the game to him he bought it... played it for a day or so then asked me how i could play such a boring game for so long... riiiiiiiiiight...

ishmael has good points... i also had DC, and all the people who cry for a DC probly sat in their subs and expected the OTHER person to sail the destroyer... the entire thing was riddled with bugs, and in general multiplayer games are way less complex than single player, and if they're complex they tend to not work well. so dumb it down (yawn) or make a great singleplayer game. i think i take option 2 :)

I see that you have never done a population sample before. I can also see that you will argue regardless of the actual results and findings. This renders any further discussion fruitless and without merit. Accordingly, I bow out and leave you gentlemen to your bar fight. I suggest that chairs and bottles make sufficient instruments of mayhem.

Don't worry Takeda Shingen, most of us know how to correctly evalute a population sample.

Results are results, whether I agree with them or not...

Or Your arguments are short of base so better is raise Your head and step outside. Is that how democracy working ?
First of all not every users browse this part of discussion board so You suceed to avoid them.
Second of all there are many many more users of seasim games than You can imagine, and many many more than registered are here.

So this poll is doubtfull wether You like it or not. Is taht clear enough ?
O yes i'll leave for the time of using the bottles in this pub.