And why exacly does the full 3D interior add nothing to gameplay?

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Steeltrap

Another point to consider is how does the 1st person aspect integrate with broader gameplay?

Suppose you have a choice of going to a damaged compartment in person and improving damage control, the trade-off being a delay in broader commands etc. That would mean the view/option was directly affecting gameplay, so is no longer solely 'eye-candy'.

But that doesn't quite make sense to me. Why would the presence of a commander in a compartment equate to an increase in damage control efficiency? Unless he was an engineering specialist before becoming a commander, that makes no sense.

[FAdmiral]

I, for one, would give up all the 3-d eye candy even if partly
functional to go back to the good ole days when SH2 played against
Destroyer Command. That NEVER got old like going on endless patrols
would do. The game needs to be programmed out of the box instead
of giving the box more compartments to look into.....

JIM

[IanC]

I'm just trying to imagine playing in a fully explorable boat, walking through the compartments, heading up the ladder to the bridge... That must add to the immersion, big time.
I bet after hours and hours of playing this way, we develop a much deeper sense of attachment with the boat and crew, than with any previous subsim.

[oscar19681]

Originally Posted by FAdmiral

I, for one, would give up all the 3-d eye candy even if partly
functional to go back to the good ole days when SH2 played against
Destroyer Command. That NEVER got old like going on endless patrols
would do. The game needs to be programmed out of the box instead
of giving the box more compartments to look into.....

JIM

Nobody is stopping you from reinstalling sh-2 and destoyer command. And hell maybe you will injoy it some much that you will skip sh-5 alltogether! Personally i never played silent hunter 1 but silent hunter 2 was a huge letdown for me. The 2-d screens. The limited zoom in the exterieur view, The feeling of being the only one on the u-boat etc etc.

[Steeltrap]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

But that doesn't quite make sense to me. Why would the presence of a commander in a compartment equate to an increase in damage control efficiency? Unless he was an engineering specialist before becoming a commander, that makes no sense.

As I said in my post,

While that example has issues of its own in realism (and I'm not attempting to advocate it), it can show that this might be more than simple prettiness.

So perhaps we should wait to see how the 1st person is used before drawing any conclusions.

My point here was not that the example I gave made sense and/or should be implemented, rather it was an attempt to say it's technically feasible they might make moving around in first person do something other than simply provide pretty graphics.

I am of the opinion that the mechanics/gameplay are the important parts - this is meant to be a simulation, after all - so my preference is to focus all efforts on that IF there's a resource constraint forcing a choice between accurate simulation and 'pretty internal views'.

Not to say some level of views aren't important to the general 'feel' of the sim, they are. It's a question of degree.

If walking around the boat doesn't alter gameplay, then I, too, tend to feel there's little point in it.

I've expressed this view consistently throughout discussions on SH5.

Cheers

[IanC]

Originally Posted by Steeltrap

If walking around the boat doesn't alter gameplay, then I, too, tend to feel there's little point in it.
Cheers

Like I just finished saying, you don't think it would add greatly to the immersion? But try hard to imagine it, the boat rocking back and forth, you walking through men at work, heading for your bunk, then up to the bow to see the progress of the torpedo loading, etc...
I personally think immersion (sense of being there) is very important in a simulation.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by IanC

Like I just finished saying, you don't think it would add greatly to the immersion? But try hard to imagine it, the boat rocking back and forth, you walking through men at work, heading for your bunk, then up to the bow to see the progress of the torpedo loading, etc...
I personally think immersion (sense of being there) is very important in a simulation.

As I said in another thread, anytime someone mentions "immersion" it means "yeah yeah yeah, you're right it adds nothing but it's something I want to see."

The presence of accurately modelled destroyer behavior, planes that can surprise you by dropping out of volumetric clouds, having to deal with mechanical breakdowns and a BDU that issues realistic orders does a heck of a lot more for "immersion" for me than watching a computer generated depiction of some schmoes in the bow compartment load a torpedo.

[Méo]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

The presence of accurately modelled destroyer behavior, planes that can surprise you by dropping out of volumetric clouds, having to deal with mechanical breakdowns and a BDU that issues realistic orders does a heck of a lot more for "immersion" for me than watching a computer generated depiction of some schmoes in the bow compartment load a torpedo.

But in an interview, Jürgen Oesten (who spent nearly 600 days at sea) says:

As far as submarine commander is... of course, the main thing and the most important thing is the crew, the training of the crew, the experience of the crew and the mentality of the crew...

So why everything that goes inside the boat should be ignored?

BTW, I didn't see anything from the devs that state that their MAIN FOCUS is to create the full 3-d interior.

Think about it, in SH3 there was what... 2 compartments?

Now there is what... maybe 2, 3 or 4 more compartments... it's not like creating the whole Fallout 3 world.

[JScones]

Wow, so many good points all round here (well, apart from the now all too common threadcrap )!

I don't know what I think now!

Focusing on the original question, I wouldn't say it adds nothing. Indeed, I would consider it complementary to the main task, which, at the macro level is pretty much as Neal states, at least in SH3 (ie goto AM52, sink ships, return home). Where I tend to disagree with Neal though is that at the micro level every engagement tends to be different, requiring different tactics, different skills, different, well, everything. To this end, I can't help but think that walking through the boat will become more repetitive much quicker than sinking ships. How many different ways can I interact with "Torpedo Guy" versus an enemy Destroyer?

Of course, the "boom" crowd would disagree - they're likely to be the ones who set everything to auto and as soon as they see an enemy ship, no matter what the solution, will press the fire button...effectively turning every engagement into the same thing. So the 3D view may add more for them than for me.

Where I will find the feature not adding to gameplay is if implementing it comes at the price of more "core" features, as others have already raised here and at various times over the last five years. Then I don't care whether "Radio Guy" massages my feet and gives me a neck rub, no amount of 3D interface will make up for it...for me.

[kptn_kaiserhof]

in theory i agree that 3d compartments are just eyecandy

but fact it adds immersion and the more immersion a game has

the more a person stays inerested

[Sgtmonkeynads]

What if they are not just eye candy this time around though.
What if the engines are down and you have to actually go back there and do something to fix the problem.
I've been dc to point where all my engineers were killed and no one else could make the engines work,,
or your cook dies, and you are the only one on ship that knows how to get the soup just right.
or will the crew starve to death, because it is no one Else's job to cook?

[oscar19681]

Ha! i made it into the articles/reviews on the subsim site! Any warhol was right when he said everybody will be famous for 15 minutes in there lives.

[hyperion2206]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

The presence of accurately modelled destroyer behavior, planes that can surprise you by dropping out of volumetric clouds, having to deal with mechanical breakdowns and a BDU that issues realistic orders does a heck of a lot more for "immersion" for me than watching a computer generated depiction of some schmoes in the bow compartment load a torpedo.

Agreed! While the graphics might be cool for a short while and perhaps make you feel like you're on a U-Boat they don't make the game more realistic (realistic=challenging). I mean it's great that you can personally go to the engine room, but that doesn't help you if BDU sends you to the coast of the US with youre type II boat.

I might be wrong but I can't imagine that the devs have been given enough time and money to make the new graphics and to upgrade the AI of the enemies.

[Nicolas]

For me it's great to not have a limited 3d interior, and the station should be 3d too, that would be fantastic, i would like to have an option to disable the 'jump to station' that i really hate, and have to walk or run, it needs more 'smart' ai crew of course. I cant believe why someone would not see how nice it will be, if done well. If the gameplay is good it will add a lot to inmersion.
I think If they put first person style into the game, its a must have the full access to the whole submarine. I wonder how they will do that. It's a new concept in simulations isn't?

Nicolas' post brings to mind a question that I hope will not offend.

SH5 appears to have (at least) two AI engines running simultaneously, that for the interactive 3-D crew on your boat and the AI which will manage the other objects in the SH5 world, aircraft, merchants, warships and what not.

Which has had developmental priority I wonder?

With finite resources available if the developers manage to have a solid and challenging enemy AI while creating an interesting and variable crew AI they may well have succeeded in pulling a very large rabbit out of a probably limited sized hat.

On the otherhand if the crew constitutes purely reactive entities with severely limited scripts and actions that aspect of the game might get very old very fast.

Good Hunting