The failure of DW

[Castout]

Imo if DW would use 3D graphics like that of Silent Hunter III it would sell hot.

Right now DW only appeals to those who have strong interest in the world of modern naval sim.

However the success of SH3 is roof itself that the market CAN appreciate and WILL appreciate a well made game.
A good products nowadays CREATE their market instead of hoping to fulfill the market needs. SET TRENDS instead of following them.

[Nexus7]

Originally Posted by Castout

Imo if DW would use 3D graphics like that of Silent Hunter III it would sell hot.

A submarine sight is it's sensors, it's there that you see

Originally Posted by Castout

A good products nowadays CREATE their market instead of hoping to fulfill the market needs. SET TRENDS instead of following them.

Good point !

[Linton]

Disappointing would be how I would describe DW.We were promised expansion packs and campaigns but they never materialised and sonalysts have not allowed a clone of scx to be developed.This has had a direct effect on my desire to play DW and if I do play now I play SCX.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by Linton

Disappointing would be how I would describe DW.We were promised expansion packs and campaigns but they never materialised and sonalysts have not allowed a clone of scx to be developed.This has had a direct effect on my desire to play DW and if I do play now I play SCX.

The clone of SCX is called RA also known as DWX.
You will not be disappointed.

[XLjedi]

Bad programming was the closest thing I could pick to how I feel about it.

I guess I would've been happier with a "Fleet Command 2" style game and all the platforms of the modern navy available for me to command.

I tend to dislike these attempts at trying to please everyone... I look at DW and PacStorm in a similar light. Either focus on making a really good simulator for a specific platform or give me a good strategic level game with lots of platforms, but don't try to do both at the same time. DW was a little heavier on the sim and lighter on strategy, PacStorm was the opposite; and both end up falling short in the end.

[Dr.Sid]

Originally Posted by aaronblood

I tend to dislike these attempts at trying to please everyone... I look at DW and PacStorm in a similar light. Either focus on making a really good simulator for a specific platform or give me a good strategic level game with lots of platforms, but don't try to do both at the same time. DW was a little heavier on the sim and lighter on strategy, PacStorm was the opposite; and both end up falling short in the end.

What part of DW is strategy ? The fact you can give orders to helo from FFG ? For me DW is clean sim.

[OneShot]

DW is the best and actually more or less only tactical ASW simulation around. Yes, there is SC and Janes 688(i) but they only show one side of the ASW game ... DW is the only game showing all sides of ASW. As far as the quality of the simulation goes ... I think that DW does simulate all platforms to a rather good level. Deep enough to allow a lot of stuff to do but not as detailed as F4 or DCS:BS (both are actually study sims of one single platform). Furthermore DW is an entirely different breed compared to PacificStorm, the only thing those two games have in common is the fact that both deal with Naval units.

[Fizanko]

But isn't the real reason of why DW is the best is because there is absolutely no competitor for the modern naval warfare simulation category (at least in the one that involve the player as actually operating the platforms, not just commanding a war in a Harpoon/Fleet Command way)?

Nearly every other naval/subsim/platform operating simulators are WW2 based, none use modern platforms.

The last non-sonalyst engine clone simulation (so discounting Sub Command and 688HK) that could at least compete in the modern sub simulation category is from 1996 (Fast Attack and Tom Clancy SSN).

In such condition, Sonalyst never had any competition in the same genre to make their serie of game, so obviously the sims were the best.

[Dr.Sid]

Yes. DW is not much good, but it is still the best. For me this is reason for NOT complaining, but it may vary for other people. In fact it clearly does.

[FERdeBOER]

Well, seems that your ComSubSim will be a great competitor to DW

I think that most of people's complains are because DW is great, but it clearly shows what it could have been if it had been completed...

[Nexus7]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

Yes. DW is not much good, but it is still the best. For me this is reason for NOT complaining, but it may vary for other people. In fact it clearly does.

? Being the only i could as well say it is the worst lol

Complaining is, I agree, like complaining against the air since Sonalyst has closed the door, and has closed the code too, so there's no way to fix some things.

Now I ask myself how would I act in the scenario where Sonalyst comes back into games business with some new stuff.
I'd think at least twice before spending money to them again... rather I'd boycott the, that's a fact...

[Zander]

i voted "bad programing" too.
even so, i would buy this game again in a heart beat.

[Seademon]

dangerous waters didn't sell because

1. It didn't have any COPY PROTECTION !!! There was no cd key to get past.

2. The game itself with multiple stations in each platform, while a good concept, was useless due to the high learning curve needed for each station and co-ordinating all that was hard and took a long time to learn wtf you were doing.

3. Then when you had a group of guys/girls playing the game on the one platform, they needed the skill level in the section they were in to operate effectively and the proper communication skills between each station to do it. It required constant training, situational awareness and command discipline, something that some gamers tried but it just burnt them out.

4. Yes the AI didn't help much.

5. Coupled with the fact that the sonar could be seen from one side of the map to the other in minutes, unlike 688, while an old game, it offered better adversarial possibilities as you had to use the sonar and work at it to get contacts when they became acknowledged more closer in.

So basically the simulation was not a "game" it became hard work, so then it left the realms of being fun to being hard work. I know i lost patience with it and dropped it as it didn't engage me and hold my interest in that regard. no fun factor.

Sure if it had a dynamic campaign it would be slightly better, but the grass roots problems would still remain. DW was built on SC which was also a failure, it was looked apoun as the great blue water hope after games like 688 and it failed to live up to the hype.

[Shearwater]

In general, I would agree that lack of copy protection is a major reason that games do not sell well. But I don't think that it applies to DW.

I think that the game in itself is useless without the printed manual, and having it copied at a local copy shop is just as expensive, or more, than buying it here on this site. I think that Sonalysts are still making money with it. So even it you haven't bought the game, you probably want to buy the manual.
However, I'll agree with you concerning the steep learning curve, and the manual does virtually nothing to solve this. You have to figure it out yourself, some way or other, and that's plain annoying. Even when buying a coffee maker, the manual doesn't explain how the thing works, but what I have to do when I want coffee. The DW manual works the other way round.

As for the fun factor: I've stated it above that I don't play DW for fun. It's something other than that - call it enjoyment or satisfaction. I don't expect it to keep me at the edge of the seat for all the thrill. Rather, I like it when ID, TMA and all that work out and I can track and hunt down a sub. Flaws and all, DW is still second to none in that category.

[XabbaRus]

I disagree that Sub Command was a failure, in fact for submarine warfare I find it more enjoyable than DW especially with SCX installed.