My Periscope vs SH5's Periscope

[shark11]

you have hint the nail on the head,I hate that periscope , am not to shore about SH5 now, its the 1940s not 2010, I wont to be in a u-boat in the 1940s to see what they would see to hear what they would hear, to work it out and get on with it, when I do a crash dive it should have German bells not American,
I have not heard them speak in german yet,and you dont really own the game if you bye it realy you are renting it,you have to be on line all the time, I have a hard time as it is playing on line with the it comeing from the other sind of the world there is allways a delay, and it ends 1943 just when the fun starts, I love the first person and to walk around the sub its great but the rest, I want to feel like I am there,
thank you....

[Frederf]

Originally Posted by karamazovnew

Until we actually have a look at the SH5 interface files, and by interface I also mean the 3D one, we can't know if a clean interface is even possible.

You see, just cleaning up the periscope is not enough, you need to do a LOT of changes to integrate everything nicely.

As a default interface, I think SH5 sports a very slick interface. I quite like it the way it is now. I doubt that it will be possible to make a full immersive 3d interface. It all depends on mouse/keyboard and camera controls and how far we're allowed to scripts things.

You give an excellent insight into the practical aspect of modding and UI design. Indeed getting the 2D and 3D worlds to play nice together with variable resolutions, languages, etc. is a challenge. Scripting power is of course very useful to overcome the challenges of modding and creating.

The very truth is said! Cleaning up the periscope is only the inciting incident into a much bigger task... changing the "home" away from the old 2D periscope screen and moving all of the tools away from the eyepiece means that we must construct a brand new home! I only hint at how this new home rises from the ashes of a decluttered eyepiece when really more detailed explanation is required.

A full 3D interface is of course very nice but I realize that 3D takes a lot of work and has some shortcomings. To do everything in 3D then you need very sharp textures (which takes a lot of VRAM and RAM), good lighting, player control (what if the knob is on the back of something?), view control, etc. 2D definitely has a place in a modern game but always 3D should be tried first and 2D only if it is necessary and a better alternative.

Here is a small example of a limited, considered 2D GUI implementation in a predominately 3D game world. Take the stadimeter target height wheel on the side of the periscope. In reality this is set to the height of the object to be measured by the stadimeter before looking through the eyepiece. One could strive to make this dial fully 3D so the player operates it (or is automated to match rec manual on easy difficulty) but this can be troublesome. The dial might be hard to see directly when placed square in front of the periscope, could be hard to read and manipulate accurately in 3D, etc.

Instead we can combine the best of 3D and 2D for a good compromise. In this way the 3D dial is a "hotzone" that is clicked which pops up a smallish 2D "dial-tool" so we can set our desired setting, read and manipulate it easily, dismiss it quickly, and go on living in a 3D world. The 2D is tolerated only briefly and is "task specific" meaning that I don't have to stare at a vast page of 30 dials when all I care about is one of them. This is also easier to program so the development is quicker.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Sober's picture: I don't like it. At least I didn't at first, because the periscope view is small and reminds me of the one in SH2, which I hated.

handy sometimes, though, like the dialogue boxes or the ID book. I was rooting for slide-outs, like the ones that have been modded into SH3.

Nothing in the periscope view. Right-click, and you're looking at Sober's view from outside the periscope, and there are all the boxes handy where you want them (or just the ones you want - removable and all that).

I think there is some room for Sober's picture's idea. Size would only be a factor of zoom or position so consider that a small detail. Slide outs perhaps, but not over the eyepiece view but over the periscope-addressed-but-not-sighted view. Having a Sober's view when at the home position of periscope-addressed but allowing a more detailed view when in true "eyepiece" mode would provide a nice aesthetic/continuity touch.

Originally Posted by col_Kurtz

I'm the amateur but I think it should be free choice for the gamer and the game should be for me or for the hard mariner... I don't like mannualy recognizing. That's right too many options icons, baloons etc... Huh... I hope it will be better than SH4... SH4 first patch, second, third... UBM and... English language on the German sub
Yeah, I know, it`s just a game, and it`s a simulation of what? Of real life and war and I want to feel it on my back and my temples, am I right? And history real history is important too!
I think they can make the game in one for casuals and for professionals. Just one thing

Making the game playable by amateur, professional, and everything in between is a noble goal. I think it's certainly possible to cover this spectrum without subjecting anyone to silly cartoon interface land.

Originally Posted by etheberge

no bearing readout when looking through the scope but I feel it might be important to keep it there as a concession to gameplay.

After all in real life you would always know the approximate bearing that you're looking at just by the position of your body relative to the sub. Unfortunately we don't have that sensory feedback when sitting in front of a computer screen.

I fear it would be easy to become disoriented when looking through the scope without the bearing readout, especially when tracking multiple targets and swiveling the scope all over the place.

Perhaps it could be left there but be made less precise? For example only leave marks for 0', 90', 180' and 270'? Then if a precise bearing is required it could be requested from the crew by a button or other means.

Other than that, I agree with almost everything you wrote and I hope we can all turn it into a reality.

I understand the bearing readout is a concession to gameplay but I'd like to revisit how necessary it is. There are many ways to not have a glass-etched bearing tape and yet still maintain easy reference to bearing and a good kinesthetic sense of periscope position. Sober's view for instance should provide a good feel of periscope direction and if the unsighted periscope-addressed view allowed easy and quick reference to the bearing markings, then it might be OK. Your concern is a very valid one but I hope we explore the more authentic alternatives before evaluating the situation as hopeless.

If you watch the YouTube recreation of a USN fleet boat in action you can see that the fact the captain doesn't see the bearing ring while sighted is not a problem. Again, shifting the perception away from the eyepiece as home position means that information-lack while in eyepiece mode is less important. If most of the captain's time is spent in the information rich periscope-addressed home position and not the sighted mode, less ouch is felt.

The captain yells "Mark!" and another helper crew member(s) reads off the bearing looking at the bearing ring. Similarly radar ranges, stadimeter results, etc do not actually have to be known (first) by the captain before they can be used for plotting/TDC. Perhaps this same idea can translate into the game where the player-captain calls for a measurement and can hear the AI crew in the background shout out in turn "Range, 3-0-0-0." "Bearing 265." It is useful for the captain to be able to see these values too but not necessarily every time.

[Frederf]

• Originally Posted by Platapus

  As I understand it, the Kaluen got the bearings from removing his eye from the eye piece and looking up.

  This was different from Fleet Subs where the Captain had a dancing partner at the periscope.

Oh see I didn't know that. I'm sure procedures varied slightly (or a lot) kaluen to kaluen but researching the textbook method of firing party (or KM equiv.) interaction would be a great place to start when designing the interaction of all the targeting-plotting elements in SH5. Sadly, this is knowledge I don't have but I know it's got to be strong in the Subsim community.

The game should be designed to make it easy and quick for the Kaluen to take a quick peek at the bearing indicator above his head and then go back to the periscope view.

Certainly if such an action was common, quick, and natural in real life it should be made so in SH5 as well. Clunky controls suit no one. I would go so far as to say if no suitable method is found for fast/easy glancing up from eyepiece to bearing can be found that it is appropriate to simultaneously display eyepiece and bearing ring perhaps as some of 90%/10% split-screen effect. I think it'd be fine to stretch a bearing tape across the top of the entire eyepiece screen for practical reasons.

However the practice of making the illusion that the bearing tape is actually an optical effect etched onto the glass is rather sickening. There's no real excuse to misrepresent reality when a more honest and easier to read method is so obvious.

The recognition manual is a bit more tricky. I imagine that if the Kaluen was not able to visually identify the target, he would verbally describe the ship to the IWO (as in the movie The Enemy Below). It would be the IWO who would flip through the recognition manual. This can bring up interesting results if the experience of the IWO can be factored (e.i., the IWO miss-identifies the target either due to his inexperience or due to errors in what the Kaluen told him.)

Unless this communication between the Kaluen and the IWO can be simulated in the game, I am afraid the the best compromise is to have the Kaluen look at the scope and the manual at the same time.

You're very right that the recognition manual is very tricky. Obviously you cannot have a normal, human conversation with AI crew like "Oh, it's a coal steamer, medium size, split deck, 2 short-fat funnels, light rigging." The AI or any possible UI simply can't cope with that.

Personally I think that flipping between the book view and eyepiece view (not simultaneously) would make an acceptable one-man job of it, but more thought and research (vs. real life) on how that could work is deserved.

[Platapus]

Since the computer can't handle our spoken syntax, another way, albeit awkward would be for the computer to play "20 questions" with the player

1. Warship or Merchant ship? Merchant
2. How many funnels? one
3. Where are they located? Stern
4. Any derricks? none
5. ......

but as you can see building a dichotomous key like can get complicated and awkward.

[ryanglavin]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Since the computer can't handle our spoken syntax, another way, albeit awkward would be for the computer to play "20 questions" with the player

1. Warship or Merchant ship? Merchant
2. How many funnels? one
3. Where are they located? Stern
4. Any derricks? none
5. ......

but as you can see building a dichotomous key like can get complicated and awkward.

It would seem to complicated, and robotic. I would rather just be able to have 1 hand on the scope and one hand in the recognition manual.

[COWBOY10]

Stunning Idea, I for one, would install a mod like this in a heartbeat. The SH5 Scope just seems to modern to me. Im sure its functional, BUT if we have a realistic boat to walk round, we need a realistic scope. I cant wait to see what our modders come up with, If its as moddable as promised, I think we may have a very very bright future ahead of us.

As to Ship Manual, Just give us a Paper one, Like we got with SH4 collectors, Can have it sat on desk, Problem solved

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by COWBOY10

As to Ship Manual, Just give us a Paper one, Like we got with SH4 collectors, Can have it sat on desk, Problem solved

More than 70 new ship models have been made for SH3. Good idea, but it would get out-of-date fast.

[COWBOY10]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

More than 70 new ship models have been made for SH3. Good idea, but it would get out-of-date fast.

LOl Ok thats a fair point, ummm maybe Neal can let us download new ship pages from here, New one out, New page. Ok we will need to strengthen the desk for the book, but hey it be upto date.

Thinking may need a better idea for this

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

More than 70 new ship models have been made for SH3. Good idea, but it would get out-of-date fast.

Ubi could offer a download version. Miss a download and you are going into battle with an out of date recognition manual.....now that's realism!

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Ubi could offer a download version. Miss a download and you are going into battle with an out of date recognition manual.....now that's realism!

I like it! And it would make Cowboy10's idea work.

[Iron Budokan]

I would also like to see this implemented.

[Apos]

Im really looking forward for that kind of mods! Well, maybe after half year i get SHV only to install mods and play with pleasure.

[Adam106]

There's some really good and innovative ideas being discussed in this thread. It's long been my wish to have this kind of interaction and verbal feedback from the crew.
See my post from nearly 2.5 years ago in regard to SHIV :

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show....php?t=121913-

many of my ideas echo the ideas at the beginning of this thread. Will the modders be up to the challenge?

[Frederf]

I swear I wrote something similar a while ago. It was "Standing Orders and Alerts" or some such. The first half of the idea was to construct custom "macros" out of simple commands to take a lot of the micro out of commanding. The second half was to have TC auto-drop to 1x on custom alerts like "we lost visual on that freighter we were end-around-ing" or "the hydrophone contact crossed the 030 bearing" so I could set such a contextual alarm and go to sleep (high TC) when doing boring maneuvers.

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Since the computer can't handle our spoken syntax, another way, albeit awkward would be for the computer to play "20 questions" with the player

1. Warship or Merchant ship? Merchant
2. How many funnels? one
3. Where are they located? Stern
4. Any derricks? none
5. ......

but as you can see building a dichotomous key like can get complicated and awkward.

... and what do you suppose someone spotted in the new screenshots?
http://www.pcgames.de/aid,705472/Sil...Bildergalerie/

see picture 32. Look at the dialog box.
*edit* I think it's a series of filters for the ship recognition manual that are accessed through the dialog interface. Which is a pretty slick way of implementing Platapus' idea.