Quote:
Originally Posted by John Channing
I am thinking of this along the same lines as Battlefield 1942. Real... not in a million years.
Fun? Hell yeah.
Luckilly for me I can enjoy both.
JCC
|
As usual, John, you hit the nail on the head. BF42, Vietnam, BF2 were all fantastic games. I enjoyed them
immensely. I would never argue they were real worlds, realistic, but they were great computer games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sober
If it makes some revenue for ubisoft and keeps them interested in submarine games and gets more captains on subsim then it has done its job  |
Agreed. And hopefully it will pull in many new guys who really haven't been interested in or exposed to submarine warfare. Who can say, maybe a successful SHO will grow the player base several times over and there could be demand for a Silent Hunter 6: like SH5 but fully engineered to replace SH3.
One thing we need to remember (we being the guys who have been playing subsims since Gato... our realism skills grew with the games. Wolfpack and Aces of the Deep were pretty simple to learn and play. There was no manual TDC, map plotting, and complexity in those games. We were ready when SH3 came along. It's possible a lot of new players are discouraged by the realism features we enjoy.
Another thing I was thinking about, how many SH3/SH4 players among us do not like TDC work? I have heard many times here, from passionate subsim players, they love realistic games but they feel the Captain does not get his hands dirty with plotting and TMO. He has officers for that.
A valid point. I personally prefer the game to depend on my actions for updating the plot map, so I play SH3/SH4 with no map contacts. My maps never show any enemy ships, I plot them all from observations (and it's usually full of errors, but hey! that was real life). That doesn't mean the guy who like real-time moving ship icons (Aces of the Deep style) is any less of a player (or more), just we have different preferences.
Cheers!
Neal