SUBSIM Radio Room Forums
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   Modern Naval Warfare (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=320)
-   -   Modern Naval Warfare - Best control room ever (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=247418)

Sean C 12-02-20 01:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenz69 (Post 2709414)
Thats where my doubt arise, even if they achieve a level of system depth that wil satisfy the more hardcore DW players, it will be very difficult to achieve the variability in terms of units. cause modders/dev will have to model the whole damn sub interior, consoles etc.. in 3D ! it will be too much of work to see real variability and choice arising.

eSim Games, the makers of Steel Beasts, started out with an extremely small team and only two 2D tank interiors. (Might have only been one, I can't remember.)


Now, they are still a relatively tiny company, but there is something like 75 or more vehicles with 3D interiors in SB. And more that can be controlled from an exterior view. Granted: many of those are variants of the same vehicles, but there are usually at least some minor differences in the models.


Also granted: it's been 20 years since the first version of SB. But that's almost 4 new vehicles per year, every year. And it's still a great sim. Anyway, my point is that small teams can indeed produce a large variety of high fidelity vehicles for a sim. And eSim doesn't even allow model mods - only textures and sounds.

UglyMowgli 12-02-20 02:14 AM
You can;t compare Esim with the Maslas bro's


Esim got a lot of contract with the military that ask for a specific type of platform, they pay for the development of the assets. On the wish list for SB Pro you have a lot of queries for some MBT, APC but as long as anyone will pay for it (full development + documentation + test) those will stay a wet dream for us.



The same for sB Pro PE, it lack some of the feature of the pro version used mainly by military who pay a big sum of money for it.

stormrider_sp 12-02-20 10:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by UglyMowgli (Post 2710770)
You can;t compare Esim with the Maslas bro's


Esim got a lot of contract with the military that ask for a specific type of platform, they pay for the development of the assets. On the wish list for SB Pro you have a lot of queries for some MBT, APC but as long as anyone will pay for it (full development + documentation + test) those will stay a wet dream for us.



The same for sB Pro PE, it lack some of the feature of the pro version used mainly by military who pay a big sum of money for it.



When eSim Games started, it was as I heard, a school project of one of the developers. Many years passed since the initial release of the demo and the first military contract. So I have to disagree with you in that one can't compare Esim with Maslas Bros. They both basically started from scratch as independent micro dev teams. On the other hand, CMNAO also followed the same route and eventually was contracted by the military.

Felipius 03-21-21 05:05 AM
Oh please....make it compatible with VR:rock::rock::rock::rock::rock:

Aktungbby 03-21-21 11:10 AM
Welcome aboard!
 
Felipius!:Kaleun_Salute:...after a 12 year silent run!:up:

Nexus 12-31-21 02:44 AM
Two things that have torpedoed DW IMO:
torpedo hit #1. SCS never solved the multiplayer mode instability issue. Considering the unbelivable quality of DW that's been like wearing a princess with lead shoes and resulted in a cascade of child troubles
torpedo hit #2. allowing the code to be touched (modded) resulted in multiple playable versions of the same game resulting in:
- never solving the multiplayer issue either (!), instead:
-- splitting an already rather small community in even smaller groups
-- requiring those who went the mods path to spend more time updating their mod than playing the game
-- generating an enormpus confusion and nervousness in discussions, with accidental mixing of featurs implemented in the mods and in the stock version
IMO if SCS solved the multiplayer instability and prevented the possibility to mod it, DW would be in a much better position today, with "everybody on the same sheet" (or platform) at least.

Consequently it is IMO critical that MNW will deny the possibility to touch/mod the code. There's already enough of a mess around.

[EDIT]
If it's true that SCS abandoned DW development because of insufficient "return of investment" i think it is a realistic option to expect that MNW will go by stages i.e.
- adding new playable platforms and/or features at a price.

zachanscom 01-20-22 02:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexus (Post 2785568)
Two things that have torpedoed DW IMO:
torpedo hit #1. SCS never solved the multiplayer mode instability issue. Considering the unbelivable quality of DW that's been like wearing a princess with lead shoes and resulted in a cascade of child troubles
torpedo hit #2. allowing the code to be touched (modded) resulted in multiple playable versions of the same game resulting in:
- never solving the multiplayer issue either (!), instead:
-- splitting an already rather small community in even smaller groups
-- requiring those who went the mods path to spend more time updating their mod than playing the game
-- generating an enormpus confusion and nervousness in discussions, with accidental mixing of featurs implemented in the mods and in the stock version
IMO if SCS solved the multiplayer instability and prevented the possibility to mod it, DW would be in a much better position today, with "everybody on the same sheet" (or platform) at least.

Consequently it is IMO critical that MNW will deny the possibility to touch/mod the code. There's already enough of a mess around.

[EDIT]
If it's true that SCS abandoned DW development because of insufficient "return of investment" i think it is a realistic option to expect that MNW will go by stages i.e.
- adding new playable platforms and/or features at a price.
multiplayer isn't important in sims, dangerous waters wasn't good in multiplayer because that was not their focus. it wasn't even a priority for them. the easiest way to break immersion in sim is by having some erratic human behavior when characters should be behaving professionally and according to codes and regulation. let modding be open within means. nothing worse than a game that cannot be modded or worse yet, pay walls it(dcs). if anything, modding will solve the multiplayer issue. but no one cares about multiplayer at all. it's a waste of time and resources to implement. immersive campaign with modding=unlimited replay value

UglyMowgli 01-20-22 03:46 PM
There will be some modding possible but not everything will be modable.

An anticheat system be put in place to avoid cheating particularly in MP mode.

Nexus 01-23-22 05:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachanscom
jesus that looks good. that paint chipping on the interior consols, the little water displacement effect from the helicopter. those details man. this is the dcs of subsims. very well done.
Perhaps some of those will be moddable :06:
Let's see what the next official announcement unveils :hmph:
DW was certainly meant for multiplay, otherwise they wouldn't have implemented so many platforms as human playable and addictionally in multistation mode (that's not for free). Also, to implement an AI that can adapt tactics in such a sim doens't look to me as an easy task. Allowing human opponents "fixes" that and that has been demonstrated it the SCS series and the communities that arose. Perhaps, but that could bee totally off, the multiplayer mode was unstable just because of routines put in place to warrant integrity, but i dunno. Online play was not the only issue (btw modding never fixed it), the mission editor was/is another.

Aktungbby 01-23-22 11:24 PM
Welcome aboard!
 
Nexus!:Kaleun_Salute:

bstanko6 01-29-22 07:13 AM
Steam page says MNW will need an FX6000 series CPU. Is that a standard or a minimum requirement?

FPSchazly 01-29-22 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bstanko6 (Post 2790580)
Steam page says MNW will need an FX6000 series CPU. Is that a standard or a minimum requirement?

It's under the Minimum requirements. It's also a 10+ year old processor series at this point (not to confused with the upcoming Ryzen 6000), so very forgiving minimum specs.

Kapitan 02-07-22 11:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachanscom (Post 2788939)
multiplayer isn't important in sims, dangerous waters wasn't good in multiplayer because that was not their focus. it wasn't even a priority for them. the easiest way to break immersion in sim is by having some erratic human behavior when characters should be behaving professionally and according to codes and regulation. let modding be open within means. nothing worse than a game that cannot be modded or worse yet, pay walls it(dcs). if anything, modding will solve the multiplayer issue. but no one cares about multiplayer at all. it's a waste of time and resources to implement. immersive campaign with modding=unlimited replay value
Always found MP in DW not too bad to be honest, in fact in the earlier years 95% of my DW play was in MP mode.

Also the seawolves group was one of the largest around at the time we had plenty of players and from memory you could play the mods as well as the stock, it was only political infighting that split them off into GNSF and Seawolves. (You also had VMC Navy plus Betasom which is still around)

In reality it was much easier to guess the human opponent than the AI especially those doing it by the books.

Andreas86 02-10-22 04:24 PM
Will there be visual representation of the crew in the boat / control room, etc..?

zachanscom 02-11-22 12:02 PM
in the pre alpga version there were crewmen, i'm guessing they were removed to better showcase the control room? i hope they come back.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50 PM.
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.