SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

OddjobXL · 04-04-07, 10:39 AM

The main problem is that most people toss around the phrase "dynamic campaign" a bit freely. What they mean is an "unscripted campaign" in many cases. True dynamic campaigns are fairly rare and hugely complicated to pull off. I'm a big fan of games like Rowan's Battle of Britain, the best example of a dynamic campaign with a truly wargame-like strategic element, and Falcon 4 which had some very complex modelling of the interaction between air and ground assets to change the complexion of a battle. This stuff can be immersive as hell when done properly.

On the other hand you can have true dynamic campaigns along the lines of Enemy Engaged which are just so simplifed that a player can see the wires pretty easily and start pulling them himself - "Oh, let's stop tanks 'spawning' so we'll blow up the tank factory" stuff. That sort of defeats the purpose of a dynamic campaign in a sim. You shouldn't personally be winning wars but rather feel like you're immersed in a war effort involving hundreds if not thousands of other units. Having cause and effect displayed, if usually a minor effect, gives a player an incremental and cumulative sense of accomplishment.

Sometimes the most immersive campaigns aren't even dynamic at all but "randomized." The most highly praised "dynamic" campaign in recent memory wasn't one of the more complex efforts but that of Red Baron 3D. And it, like the campaigns in SH3 and SH4, was randomized to simulate the feeling of a dynamic campaign but without getting bogged down in the often technical weeds. The best way to keep a player from getting in the mindset of 'beating the war singlehanded' to experiencing a simulation is to keep the resolution of the war out of his hands. Focus on missions and the emergent properties of a good randomization effort.

It's too soon for me to judge how successful SH4 is. I need to get it to stop crashing long enough to really indulge. But from what I've experienced so far it's growing on me even over SH3 GWX. The interaction via mission reporting/assigning at sea and war updates from HQ is wonderful. Just wish they could limit FOX reports to nearby units, task forces and convoys to keep the clutter down.

04-04-07, 10:39 AM	#15
OddjobXL Torpedoman Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 119 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	The main problem is that most people toss around the phrase "dynamic campaign" a bit freely. What they mean is an "unscripted campaign" in many cases. True dynamic campaigns are fairly rare and hugely complicated to pull off. I'm a big fan of games like Rowan's Battle of Britain, the best example of a dynamic campaign with a truly wargame-like strategic element, and Falcon 4 which had some very complex modelling of the interaction between air and ground assets to change the complexion of a battle. This stuff can be immersive as hell when done properly. On the other hand you can have true dynamic campaigns along the lines of Enemy Engaged which are just so simplifed that a player can see the wires pretty easily and start pulling them himself - "Oh, let's stop tanks 'spawning' so we'll blow up the tank factory" stuff. That sort of defeats the purpose of a dynamic campaign in a sim. You shouldn't personally be winning wars but rather feel like you're immersed in a war effort involving hundreds if not thousands of other units. Having cause and effect displayed, if usually a minor effect, gives a player an incremental and cumulative sense of accomplishment. Sometimes the most immersive campaigns aren't even dynamic at all but "randomized." The most highly praised "dynamic" campaign in recent memory wasn't one of the more complex efforts but that of Red Baron 3D. And it, like the campaigns in SH3 and SH4, was randomized to simulate the feeling of a dynamic campaign but without getting bogged down in the often technical weeds. The best way to keep a player from getting in the mindset of 'beating the war singlehanded' to experiencing a simulation is to keep the resolution of the war out of his hands. Focus on missions and the emergent properties of a good randomization effort. It's too soon for me to judge how successful SH4 is. I need to get it to stop crashing long enough to really indulge. But from what I've experienced so far it's growing on me even over SH3 GWX. The interaction via mission reporting/assigning at sea and war updates from HQ is wonderful. Just wish they could limit FOX reports to nearby units, task forces and convoys to keep the clutter down.