I got it!-New idea for Dangerous Waters

[Captain Norman]

Because Sonalysts said they would only add new platforms in an addon or a new game, I have a great idea for a new one. An Aircraft Carrier!
They could even do their next game on an aircraft carrier, cause it could still use the Dangerous Waters engine and format.
Imagine this. Ur sailing in the Persian Gulf when you get orders to scramble all fighters. You immediately give out the order to do so, and set a series of waypoints that lead them to their target, a series of enemy ships.
If they did it right, which im sure they could, this could make for an interesting game, with all the tactical possiblities.

[Linton]

Sonalysts for their own reasons do not want to make DW into another SCX so I ask two questions:
1 Just what do they intend to do with DW and over what timescale?
2 What will replace DW?
The ability to play many different submarines was the beauty of SCX yet this has been ignored with DW.Many of us outside the colonies would like to drive their own warships.I would even volunteer to do the RN officer vocal parts for nothing!
So far I have been very dis-illusioned with DW because I am being restricted over what platforms I can use.If I had more time I would be reverse engineeriing the increased reality back into SCX.
Finally what will replace DW?when I first started reading this site there was a certain buzz on iy as various people were busy making Subcommand into SCX, that seems to be missing at the moment with DW.
In the Uk we sometimes describe something as a Curate's egg-only good in parts.That would be an over estimation for DW

[Captain Norman]

Thats a very good point you have. In my opinion, the ability to control every ship is a little too large, but, what Sonalysts is doing now is a little stupid. We are limited with what we can mod, as we can only mod existing platforms. The community should be supported more, as many submarines and ships id like to see our missing (cough cough Canada). Now, an aircraft carrier would be cool as a seprate game, but, there needs to be a larger sphere of units we can control in Dangerous Waters.

[Linton]

Sonalysts are you reading this thread?

[Sea Demon]

I'm not trying to kill your ideas or anything. I want to see new playables also( *cough* Arleigh Burke *cough*). But Sonalysts has explained their business model many times before. I suggest you read through some of the other threads that explain why they do this. Actually it looks like their business relationship with the government is the only reason you even get a naval sim of the caliber of DW in the first place. Sonalysts IS NOT primarily a game maker. But they are darn good at what they do. They have said that they will make add-ons if sales permit.

And I'm not sure of what all the complaining is about. I have yet to find ANY naval sim of the depth and performance of DW. Have faith gents.

[Captain Norman]

I wanna have faith, and I know they arent a game development company, but come on. Thats what mods are for. If they give US the tools in the hands of talented people *cough* Bill Nichols and TLAM Strike *cough*, we could do it, and it wouldnt cost em money. Some of the best games have been in the form of mods, so let us have a shot.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Captain Norman

I wanna have faith, and I know they arent a game development company, but come on. Thats what mods are for. If they give US the tools in the hands of talented people *cough* Bill Nichols and TLAM Strike *cough*, we could do it, and it wouldnt cost em money. Some of the best games have been in the form of mods, so let us have a shot.

If I read their business model correctly, this type of modding may be the end of Sonalysts naval combat games. If we can modify their products, why not their government business clients as well? And if that's the case, what incetive would Sonalysts have in creating new games? I mean they are in business to make money after all. And from what I understand, naval games are made for a very niche market. Sounds to me like most of the money from development of these products come from govt. clients that have a modified version of what we get.

BTW, Sonalysts said they will build new add-ons with adequate sales. But they have to make them. Not that big of a deal.

[holyspirit]

DW even doesn't offer enhanced realism compared the previous title Sub Command
. Yes, DW is cosmetically slightly better than Sub Command but that's all. With the same kind of campaign(or slightly more dissapointing because no more of that voiced-slideshows in between campaign mission). The campaigns seem to be a loose combination of separate missions there's just no continuing feeling anymore.

I dun really mind the obsolete graphics if a game can offer a terrific gameplay such like Steel Beast(Worst gaming graphics i've ever seen in the 2000s but i'm really hooked with it because of the sheer realism of the GAMEPLAY). DW is lacking in realism thus gameplay AND graphics. I think DW was a somehat rushed game not meant to be a classic). Oh there i said it. Though i still keep DW in my harddrive, i usuaaly stop playing after half an hour. It's there just to remind me the memory of how Sub Command brought me hours of fun that's now seem to be desperately lacking in DW.

But look at the bright side at least someone got it beautifully correct in Silent Hunter III. I hope a modern sub sim which compares to SH3 will come out....SOON. If not maybe i will have to take a few years course in 3d modelling and AI programming to make myself one out of my own pays .

[LuftWolf]

The real achievements of DW are missed by a lot of people: 1) the integration of the battlespace for playable air, surface, and submarine platforms, as well as 2) the ability for multiple players to command a single platform against other playable platforms in multiplayer.

I think its great that the people calling for more modding ability are amongst the least likely to do any of the modding.

I quite happy with what's on my plate now. The potential of DW to surpass SC/SCX is very significant, and the team has more than enough tools at our disposal, without any help from SCS, although to their credit, they are beginning to understand that they need us (the modders).

TLAM is currently modelling for the next release of LWAMI, and Bill Nichols is doing excellent work in mission design. I can't speak for them, but I can say that suggesting that we do more work for the community takes for granted that we are already doing a lot of work for the community, or at least that's my opinion.

A lot of people talk like DW is not moving forward, or inevitably doomed to be limited because of this reason or that, but those comments are really ignorant, if only because so few people know anything about DW at all.

Cheers,
David

PS My wishes include the reinvolvement of jsteed, Ludger, finiteless, and Thomasew in the daily activities of SubSim. DW is years behind without them.

[goldorak]

Luftwolf you're doing one hell of a job and the community as a whole should be happy to see just how far DW has come from the 1.0 release.

You know this situation with DW reminds me of all the problems with modding that Falcon 4 AF has.
Falcon 4 had a very large community of modders who took literaly the game to new heights.
The new version is shall we say "crippled" with respect to modding and a lot of good modders just left F4AF to its own destiny because of this and gone back to good old mod friendly Falcon 4.
Even with this desertion F4AF is still a lot better than old Falcon.

I think that DW is facing the same kind of problems of F4AF.
Limited modding and only very few modders willing to do something about it.
In this very difficult context people should really appreciate what you're doing.

Maybe with time more SC/SCX old time modders will see the light and come give you a hand.

[aaken]

We are limited with what we can mod, as we can only mod existing platforms.

Who told you that? Do you want a playable Victoria? A playable ASW surface platform of your country? Do you have some data about its sensors and weapons? If the weapon layout of the ship you'd like to drive is not too different from the layout of the Perry FFG (the same applies for the submarines) then it's not too difficult to make playables in the place of the exisiting playables. Unfortunately no-one, except SCS, can ADD new playables, but everybody can make playables that overwrite the previous, provided that you have some data, for the sake of realism. I've been doing that for the past months and mainly for the Italian Navy (although I made a sub and an FFG for Spain and, recently the Victoria for Canada). If I can do it, anybody can, and if somebody can't, then just write down your ideas and possibly somebody will try to implement them. It doesn't happen in one day but most modders do what they do in their own free time, which is limited.

[LuftWolf]

Here is where we get into a gray area.

Technically, all that is needed to make a Platform Changing Utility is some kind of shell like JSGME that swaps out databases which contain different versions of platforms, and perhaps if we get cocky, even new graphics files for the platforms.

So, using this format, various missions could be marked as PSU-1, PSU-2, PSU-3, etc. and setup to take advantage of the various platforms as configured in that database/doctrine/interface set.

Now, aside from the significant logistical challenge this poses to the community, it is also CLEARLY a violation of SCS's stated request not to mod new playables.

Jamie has been very clear on this: no hacking of DW for new playables, even if it is of the "soft"-hack variety.

My personal opinion on this is that there is so much other work that has to be done to improve what is already in DW, that spending time adding new things is a bit irresponsible. That having been said, when it perhaps comes time to make period databases, I'll be much more interested in pushing the boundaries of what SCS considers to be hacking.

But like I said, as things stand now, I have more than enough on my plate and am interested in improving the support I get from SCS, not reducing it and getting myself removed from the Beta process.

[aaken]

I definitely concurr, it's a grey area.
But again, just for the sake of the discussion, it's not obvious to grasp the legal difference (if there is any) between modifing the database changing, for example, the characteristics of a torpedo, or the top-speed of a sub (also a playable sub) or the range of a sensor (also the ones used by playable units) and changing the characteristics of a playable unit (thus making it an altogether different unit).

[goldorak]

Aaken you can afford to stay on the grey line, but Luftwolf is caught between the hammer and the anvil.

[aaken]

Yeah I know, I'm lucky. I love lingering in the grey area