My Theory
 

I've already made a post about it but I thought it could fit better for a whole thread.


I've seen so many comments comparing SHV with simulations like Aces of the deep that I came to wonder why those types of simulations are no longer in development? (except for independent development with very limited budget).


So my ''theory'' (this is only a ''theory'', I don't claim to have a certainty on these things)
is that the gaming market is largely influenced by our modern way of life.

i.e. Today everything has to be quick. Quick dinner, quick training, quick entertaining... and so on.

So deep simulations with an important learning curve are no longer attractive (except for a minority, in which I am included).

I think Ubisoft understood that and this is what Dan meant when he said in the interview (the video interview) that you don't have to read 10 books on German U-boat to play the game.


I'm afraid we will have to rely on the modding community in the future to get those games a much more deeper content.

I think you're exactly right. The younger generation has been so bombarded with stimuli that anything requiring a modicum of patience is not appreciated. A subsim is by very definition an exercise in patience and hunting....not a big seller in today's go go now now now world.

I replayed Call of Duty: World At War the other week (there's another thing...it took me 3 days to beat the whole SP game)...and the cutscenes in the game...super slick and well done with the animation, but they just flew by. Any visual element of them wasn't on the screen for more than 1 to 2 seconds. The kids of today wouldn't demand anything different.

Another indicator....check out a blockbuster movie trailer made in the past 5 years. Compare it to one made 30 or 40 years ago. Today's movie trailers are a barrage of images and scenes. Rapid fire eye movement...constant stimulation.

For better or for worse, this is how our entertainment is being fed to us now.

I expect both of you are correct. Societal interests are always changing, and we are going to have to rely on modders to provide deeper, more meaningful, content.

I think you both nailed it.
Kids don't even read books nowadays.

I think the game companies want it this way. They want ADD kiddies that always need a new game every two weeks. It costs them less to produce such crap and they make more then they do off of people who are content with a good title for 3 - 5 years.

Exactly!

I have no idea what will be the solution...it's like trying to solve the insoluble. :-?

Modding will always have limits I guess.

... IMHO the 'solution' is companies that actually care about gaming, and not just profits ... how, who, and when are yet to be seen tho ...

Yeah! another good point.

cut the pocket-money!!

I don't think a company really cares... it's always come down to people in that company, good people cares.

Good, passionate & competent people backed with a good budget can do miracles, IMHO.

Couldn't agree more.
 

Yup, it's all about "attention span", LOL. I forget where I saw/heard this but as a graphic example look at any modern music video such as seen on MTV (MTV is hard to watch on any given day anyway!:har:). Not one camera angle/view will last more than 5 seconds before it changes. I've actually tried this and it's accurate. Each time the camera view changes in the video start counting, you'll rarely reach 5 seconds. That about sums up the "younger generation" and the quick fix/disposable society we live in (and is probably a clear sign I'm getting older, LOL).:D

Reading has always been an eclectic activity. And you're right, kids don't read print books, but they do read e-books, more and more.

I expect the argument was much the same when the Gutenberg Press came into being. "These kids nowadays. Don't know the value of vellum!" :O:

Yea and I as a kid feel pretty damaged, as I have aquired this "faster, quicker, more exciting" mind over many years through this new age of hyper-entertainment. It's ruined my peace and patience and reading books really is harder for me now.


peace

Could be Ubisoft and the Dev's are going by the assumption that the "short attention span" market is larger, and they can make more profit by orienting the game towards them.

However, they've still got the core followers in us old school simulator types. We're obviously devoted to the series. We're willing to spend the time modding the game into a simulator.

So if they market the game towards the "SAS" crowd, in addition to providing the tools to modify the game into a sim, then they've hit both markets with a minimum of effort (thereby maximizing profits).

I totally agree with you theluckyone17, its not like the SAS crowd will want to mod a Sim into a navel shoot em up game anyway right.

To please every crowd that can be potentially be interested in your subsim, just make plenty of realism optional settings that anyone can modify to tailor the product to his liking.

That worked perfectly in past subsim to get both the action player and the simulation player on the same product without frustrating any of them, it was just a matter of enabling or disabling whatever realism options you wanted.

It was possible to get nearly an arcade level subsim in which torpedoes where autoguided by the most elite "i spot and hear everything" crew, to hit any target that moved after the player was just putting the crosshair on them, or having to setup your firing solutions just to enrage because that was a damn dud torpedo that just made the destroyer now going to be angry after he avoided your previous carefully calculated one.

MT... V NOOO!!! onlything they play is rap.:dead: yea, for people with short attention spans...

The amusing thing is we are made to feel guilty for re-selling games rapid-fire despite that behavior being exactly that which is cultivated in us. Similarly, publishers and developers complain about the budget that modern graphics requires, again because that is what behavior is cultivated in us.

Entertainment being competitive strives to outdo other entertainment by having "more" and "bigger" events without a thorough understanding of how those events work. A game is often marketed as "more exciting" if enemies come at you in double the numbers, but we all know that doubling the size of the monster or the number of times it breaks out of a wall exactly on cue doesn't double the value of the entertainment. We also know that constant excitement is not possible as excitement is only achievable contrasted with slower-paced events.

An ideal Silent Hunter for example would not increase the rate of torpedoings and sinkings in some blind dash to "make more exciting" but instead let those events being brilliant in their rarity while doing as much as possible to make the times over than those events enjoyable. Examples could be mechanical breakdowns, better weather, D/F radio modeled, etc.

Well... they've released four games so far, and they've been fairly sim-my. Can't blame them if they want to try a new tack. It's like the new Star Trek film, I guess, some people like it when you break from convention, some people don't.

I, too, would prefer a sim over this action game, though. I enjoy action games (like the Star Wars Rogue Squadron series), but they often irritate me more than they entertain me. The macho Hollywood approach just isn't for me.

It's certainly about the "instant gratification" and the "I want it and I want it now" society that's crept in over the last 5 or so years.

I'm seeing it at work - 21 year olds that come and then leave because they weren't promoted to CEO within the first week (no, not exaggerating). :doh: