Petition to S.C.S for a SDK

Lagger123987 · 05-12-07, 03:26 PM

What you guys think? Should we ask S.C.S to release a SDK?

fatty · 05-12-07, 04:21 PM

Go for it, but it will never happen, for the same reason that we aren't "allowed" to make our own units.

OneShot · 05-12-07, 04:21 PM

We can ask SCS for a lot of things but this is something we most likely wont get ... why? Because DW is just an offspin of SCS product for its goverment customers. They make money by creating platforms and stuff for them. Guess what they don't want ... that those customers can get their new platforms and whatnot for free.

But hey ... it never hurts to ask - just dont hold your breath.

Cheers
OS

Dr.Sid · 05-12-07, 05:08 PM

They won't make it anyway. Such thing needs documentation and support. And it will expose bugs not exposed yet.
It is more expensive then not releasing anything, that's sure

Chock · 05-12-07, 05:34 PM

Would be nice, but... You might as well ask for the plans to the real platforms for all you are likely get anywhere LOL.

As OneShot points out, they'll not want to feed the hand that will clearly bite it!

Lagger123987 · 05-12-07, 06:45 PM

Just keep up the votes up then we band together to force S.C.S to release it.

azn_132 · 05-12-07, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lagger123987

Just keep up the votes up then we band together to force S.C.S to release it.

How are u goin to force S.C.S to release a SDK?

Hawk66 · 05-14-07, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneShot

We can ask SCS for a lot of things but this is something we most likely wont get ... why? Because DW is just an offspin of SCS product for its goverment customers. They make money by creating platforms and stuff for them. Guess what they don't want ... that those customers can get their new platforms and whatnot for free.

Probably true. But perhaps a limited SDK would be possible. The limitation could be, that you cannot create new units but that you could enhance the existing ones and other areas, like AI, engine, mission editor and so on.

Regarding the comparison to SBPro. I don't know the license politics of SCS in detail, but is DW not only licensable to endusers and not to commercial/government users?

Anyway, an official statement of SCS regarding this issue and the future of DW in general, would be nice. In the other case, this topic arise in the community on a regulary basis, which does not have any positive effects.

OneShot · 05-14-07, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawk66

Probably true. But perhaps a limited SDK would be possible. The limitation could be, that you cannot create new units but that you could enhance the existing ones and other areas, like AI, engine, mission editor and so on.

Well we do have sort of an limited SDK already ... We can play around with the doctrines and the database, we have a powerful mission editor, we can tamper with the graphics and the sound to some extend (tho we dont have access to the engine itself). What we cant do is play around with the hardcoded AI, interfaces and all the stuff thats in the engine itself.

In other words we do have already a lot of possibilities to play around with the game, however only few of the community have taken the steps to work on those ... And aside from things in the game there is a lot of stuff relating to the game that could be done and again only a small number is actually doing something in those areas. For example comprehensive tutorials (yes we do have some, but some areas - especially the FFG are still pretty sparse), wider range of missions (you know there are more then just the sub platforms in the game ... the majority of missions still centers around the sub platforms). So, lots of possibilities, but whenever there is a call for stuff you see a lot of views on the relevant posts on the forum but zero answers.

But when somebody wants to petition SCS for new platforms, everybody jumps on the bandwagon and everything will be better - if SCS could just include a Tico, Burke, another sub, SSBN, whatever (fill in your favourite platform). Sure, its a lot easier to use stuff others made then put in some time yourself.

Btw. : Big thanks and kudos to all the modders, mission designers and everybody else in the community who try to enrich the game and our experience with it.

Cheers
OS

Hawk66 · 05-14-07, 03:33 PM

No reason to be angry. As you perhaps know, I've already started work on a tool (RandomEnviornment). Hence, I'm not just passive and 'whining'.

The mission editor is indeed powerful but in some areas the engine/AI have deficits. Specially in that areas, which you've mentioned (non-Sub) and when you want to include air platforms you reach the limit of the engine.

A SDK would just enrich the possibilites, nothing more. Have a look at those games/sims, which provide one (or a 'real' script language) like Civ4,ArmedAssault and Orbiter and how the AddOns 'boosted' the original sim.

LuftWolf · 05-15-07, 03:30 AM

It's hard to see who is going to make all these future mods when we can't even get a list of playable scenarios together.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=105791

Cheers,
David

caymanlee · 06-20-07, 06:57 AM

Can't believe some people vote "No"??!!!!

:hmm:

Nexus7 · 06-27-07, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caymanlee

Can't believe some people vote "No"??!!!!

:hmm:

I cant believe this topic has gone so far... why don't directly ask them the source code :rotfl:

SUBMAN1 · 05-13-07, 07:07 PM

I voted no simply because it is something you will never get. It is pretty clear that they have a tech base that they are not willing to give up - why? Because suppose they decide to make a Ticonderoga sim based on this engine, yet someone has already done it? Basically, an SDK is taking money out of their pockets.

-S

Sea Demon · 05-13-07, 09:41 PM

I vote for us trying to build more support for DW, so maybe Sonalysts will just build us new add-ons. Seems to me that that's the only way with this sim. They're only going to do it if it's profitable for them. And I wouldn't expect it any other way. This poll is not useful in any way.

View Poll Results: SDK or No SDK?
Yes	105	86.07%
No	17	13.93%
Voters: 122. You may not vote on this poll

05-12-07, 03:26 PM	#1
Lagger123987 Grey Wolf Join Date: May 2007 Location: Little Saigon, San Jose, California Posts: 944 Downloads: 323 Uploads: 4	Petition to S.C.S for a SDK What you guys think? Should we ask S.C.S to release a SDK?

05-12-07, 04:21 PM	#3
OneShot Grey Wolf Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 956 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	We can ask SCS for a lot of things but this is something we most likely wont get ... why? Because DW is just an offspin of SCS product for its goverment customers. They make money by creating platforms and stuff for them. Guess what they don't want ... that those customers can get their new platforms and whatnot for free. But hey ... it never hurts to ask - just dont hold your breath. Cheers OS __________________ All the things you always wanted to know about Dangerous Waters but never dared to ask!

05-15-07, 03:30 AM	#11
LuftWolf Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2005 Location: Free New York Posts: 3,167 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	It's hard to see who is going to make all these future mods when we can't even get a list of playable scenarios together. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=105791 Cheers, David __________________ LW

05-13-07, 07:07 PM	#14
SUBMAN1 Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 11,866 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I voted no simply because it is something you will never get. It is pretty clear that they have a tech base that they are not willing to give up - why? Because suppose they decide to make a Ticonderoga sim based on this engine, yet someone has already done it? Basically, an SDK is taking money out of their pockets. -S __________________

05-12-07, 04:21 PM	#2
fatty The Old Man Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,448 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Go for it, but it will never happen, for the same reason that we aren't "allowed" to make our own units.

05-12-07, 05:08 PM	#4
Dr.Sid The Old Man Join Date: May 2005 Location: Czech Republic Posts: 1,458 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	They won't make it anyway. Such thing needs documentation and support. And it will expose bugs not exposed yet. It is more expensive then not releasing anything, that's sure

05-12-07, 05:34 PM	#5
Chock Sea Lord Join Date: May 2005 Location: Under a thermal layer in chilly Olde England Posts: 1,842 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Would be nice, but... You might as well ask for the plans to the real platforms for all you are likely get anywhere LOL. As OneShot points out, they'll not want to feed the hand that will clearly bite it!

05-12-07, 06:45 PM	#6
Lagger123987 Grey Wolf Join Date: May 2007 Location: Little Saigon, San Jose, California Posts: 944 Downloads: 323 Uploads: 4	Just keep up the votes up then we band together to force S.C.S to release it.

05-14-07, 03:33 PM	#10
Hawk66 Commodore Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Germany Posts: 609 Downloads: 36 Uploads: 0	No reason to be angry. As you perhaps know, I've already started work on a tool (RandomEnviornment). Hence, I'm not just passive and 'whining'. The mission editor is indeed powerful but in some areas the engine/AI have deficits. Specially in that areas, which you've mentioned (non-Sub) and when you want to include air platforms you reach the limit of the engine. A SDK would just enrich the possibilites, nothing more. Have a look at those games/sims, which provide one (or a 'real' script language) like Civ4,ArmedAssault and Orbiter and how the AddOns 'boosted' the original sim.

06-20-07, 06:57 AM	#12
caymanlee Medic Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Centre Posts: 161 Downloads: 32 Uploads: 0	Can't believe some people vote "No"??!!!! :hmm:

05-13-07, 09:41 PM	#15
Sea Demon Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: USA Posts: 2,552 Downloads: 33 Uploads: 0	I vote for us trying to build more support for DW, so maybe Sonalysts will just build us new add-ons. Seems to me that that's the only way with this sim. They're only going to do it if it's profitable for them. And I wouldn't expect it any other way. This poll is not useful in any way.