Pacific or Atlantic? why cant we have both??

JU_88 · 03-27-06, 05:25 AM

I agree 100% that SHIV needs to be Pacific, another Atlantic game alone (3rd in a row) would be marketing suicide for Ubi.
There is a divide though, some what Pacific, while some feel the Atlanic isnt finnished...
But its SH4 not SH3.5 after all right?

But who says we cant have both?? i personally think they should re-relase Sh3 on the same disk as SH4 pacific, touched up with all the improvments they apply to SH4 rather that worry about backwards comptibilty with SH3 - which will be quite outdated by the time SHIV is due for release next year.

Imagine if you could play as German, British, US and japanese submarines?

Look at it this way, the Atlantic campaign is already 80% done! it just needs some more german and italian traffic moddelled, in the North sea and the Med.

The U-boats are already done! and just need to be imported from SH3, (though they really do need to model the type XIV) The Germans could still be included in the pacific for their limited role in the south china sea (Monsun boats).

They could model playable S,T,U,V class submarines for the Brits. (U and V are virtually identical anyway, like a VIIB is to a VIIC)
The Brits hunting grounds would be the Med, Baltic and North seas where their subs had much success. Later on they can join the pacific campaign with the U.S against the japanese (T-class subs were used here)

The U.S and Japanese Subs would all need to be done from sratch along witht the entire pacific Campaign! that will be the main priority for SH4 after all.

Think about it, they have:
The Game Engine (which will need some tweaking),
Campaign Editor,
A ton of ships already modlelled,
And the best part of two years to work on the project....
Consider that the first two on the list took up most of SH3s development time, are already in place thus freeing up alot of time and rescources to concentrate elsewhere.

Then Just think what a destroyer command addon could offer for my fantasy version of SH4!!!
The end product could be both theatres, with 4 sides, with playble Destroyers and Subs.
Now that would keep almost everyone of us happy so long as they maintain and hopefully improve on level of detail that was in SH3!

I know the more die hard simmers here might frown upon this idea, as they worry that having four nations subs = less detail for each one, and yes, more content means some trade offs, theres no doubt about it.
But dont you think four campaigns over multiple theatres is going to add to more long lasting playabilty than say- being able to visit all your subs compartments?, lets face it we spend most of the game staring at the nav map anyway! I know thats just one example, but the level of detail in an unmodded SH3 is already satisfactory no?

Am I wrong? your opinions please.

03-27-06, 05:25 AM	#1
JU_88 Silent Hunter Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: UK Posts: 3,803 Downloads: 11 Uploads: 0	Pacific or Atlantic? why cant we have both?? I agree 100% that SHIV needs to be Pacific, another Atlantic game alone (3rd in a row) would be marketing suicide for Ubi. There is a divide though, some what Pacific, while some feel the Atlanic isnt finnished... But its SH4 not SH3.5 after all right? But who says we cant have both?? i personally think they should re-relase Sh3 on the same disk as SH4 pacific, touched up with all the improvments they apply to SH4 rather that worry about backwards comptibilty with SH3 - which will be quite outdated by the time SHIV is due for release next year. Imagine if you could play as German, British, US and japanese submarines? Look at it this way, the Atlantic campaign is already 80% done! it just needs some more german and italian traffic moddelled, in the North sea and the Med. The U-boats are already done! and just need to be imported from SH3, (though they really do need to model the type XIV) The Germans could still be included in the pacific for their limited role in the south china sea (Monsun boats). They could model playable S,T,U,V class submarines for the Brits. (U and V are virtually identical anyway, like a VIIB is to a VIIC) The Brits hunting grounds would be the Med, Baltic and North seas where their subs had much success. Later on they can join the pacific campaign with the U.S against the japanese (T-class subs were used here) The U.S and Japanese Subs would all need to be done from sratch along witht the entire pacific Campaign! that will be the main priority for SH4 after all. Think about it, they have: The Game Engine (which will need some tweaking), Campaign Editor, A ton of ships already modlelled, And the best part of two years to work on the project.... Consider that the first two on the list took up most of SH3s development time, are already in place thus freeing up alot of time and rescources to concentrate elsewhere. Then Just think what a destroyer command addon could offer for my fantasy version of SH4!!! The end product could be both theatres, with 4 sides, with playble Destroyers and Subs. Now that would keep almost everyone of us happy so long as they maintain and hopefully improve on level of detail that was in SH3! I know the more die hard simmers here might frown upon this idea, as they worry that having four nations subs = less detail for each one, and yes, more content means some trade offs, theres no doubt about it. But dont you think four campaigns over multiple theatres is going to add to more long lasting playabilty than say- being able to visit all your subs compartments?, lets face it we spend most of the game staring at the nav map anyway! I know thats just one example, but the level of detail in an unmodded SH3 is already satisfactory no? Am I wrong? your opinions please.