Neil is spot on in this respect, naval games cant muster the same returns on investment as a modern AAA title can. However, indie developers can fill some of the gap, though with less sim and more simplistic systems.
One another point though; The vast majority of people who cry out for "realism" are not actually
for realism in gaming. Its actually people who want a game to be a specific way they themselves expect, who then make the claim its in the interest of the game due to "realism". But the reality is complexity = / = realism, and what some people want is overly complex systems just to satisfy an OCD style mentality. (PS not directed at you Merc, just a general point)
Its like someone saying; "This game needs more water effects for better realism!". Well for realism sake I could come around to someone's home while playing and chuck buckets of water around them every time the on-screen character gets wet. But almost all players do not want that level of realism.
Some people demand things that are simply non-starters, because to translate them in to a game would simply be zero "fun" for the majority of the intended market. Someone may find it fun to click eleventy jagillion menus in a game, but for everyone else its simply far far to tedious and not "fun". While fun is a subjective thing, it can be quantified in some respects for a collective group. Which is why people support teams in sports, or go to concerts and the like.
Unfortunately for the Naval sim game, its simply not popular enough.
Oh and Neil check out "Victory at Sea" on steam, its based on the tabletop naval combat game.
