Questions for the SH5 dev team???

[difool2]

[OT] Is that tank sim Red Orchestra?

[GlobalExplorer]

I would like to know if there will be:

wolfpacks
detailed radio traffic
better physics: flooding, sinking mechanics as in GWX
more detailed damage and repair system

is the manual targeting system dumbed down? Or the same as SHIII? Or an even improved version ??

[CaptainHaplo]

Ok, I am likely to start a ruckus here, but here goes.

#1 - Will the new engine handle convoy/TF kills properly? By this, I mean no more zombie ships? They were in both SH3 and SH4 and to be honest, were one of the most annoying things ever. Seeing a carrier steam by 8 hours after you sank her - running at max speed to catch up with the rest of the TF, and being invulnerable to boot - just really bugged me.

#2 - Will SH5 impliment a strategic layer similiar to SH4 1.5, with the ability to control additional assets?

#3 - Will the air layer handling allow for standard patrols, vs a plane heading out on a contact report to fly directly over your conning tower as SH4 did?

#4 - Will SH5 handle sensors more accurately? Primarily, the Mark 1 Eyeball being the largest issue. Different mediums should have different sensor effects. For example - an Airplane should be likley to spot me if I am on the surface and it flies close enough - but if it flies over me at the same distance and I am at 150' - it ought to have literally no chance to spot me. Being spotted visually at 300+ feet on a regular basis needs to be fixed. Various attenuations to the sensors based on the medium or mediums they use would be great!

I have more but for now this is a good start!

[longam]

Will the crew stop yelling after they get excited? Always after hitting C....

[Sag75]

Will we have the possibility to hear by hydrophones a convoy up to 50 nautical miles?

Will we have a more sophisticated sonarman and sonar instrumentation?


Thx,

[Darkbluesky]

Could it be / Will it be compatible with Nvidia 3D Vision system? Silent Hunter III is partially compatible (HUD not usable, and some incoherence between stations) and it is very very nice and a very good immersion factor for a sub!

SH4 was less compatible with a fake stereoscopic effect, so I am afraid if SH5 is done upon the base of SH4 that it will not be compatible, which is a real pity.

NVIDIA is giving support to developpers to make their games 3D Vision compatible, and Ubisoft has publicly stated the adhesion to that technology (with Avatar has the flagship), so...please, could you (developers) do it compatible with NV 3D Vision?

[TDK1044]

Hey, Devs, Boxers or Briefs?.....now post a group picture to prove it.

[GreyOctober]

Captain Obvious says: "You can see the conning tower and deck gun casting shadows as well as the ship in the background"

[TheDarkWraith]

I do see some problems on the dynamic shadow casting though: look on the right side of the sub where the conning tower is casting the shadow. On the right hand side vertical plane of the sub's hull it's still lit like the rest of the sub - maybe they're factoring in the light reflection from the water but if so then it's biased way too much to the light reflection to me. This is also apparent on the conning tower. I would've expected those two areas to be darker than the rest of the sub since it's having a shadow cast on it. The horizontal planes look like the shadowing casting is working right.
Also just noticed that I can't 'see' through the water like in SHIV - I can't see the hull of the sub underwater. Looks like SH3 rendering there with the sub and ship's hulls. This might be because of the lighting in this particular screenshot but I hope I'm wrong
I'm hoping that the shadow I'm seeing in the background by the ship is the ship - but it could be the crane casting the shadow. It would be nice to have the harbors casting shadows (and correctly). Ultimately it would be great if all objects cast shadows onto other objects AND onto the water. But if they are 'making' the harbors like they did in SH3 this will never happen. Hopefully they've changed the way harbors are 'made'.
Seeing that the dock isn't casting a shadow onto the water tells me that the dynamic shadow casting still isn't working correctly and/or the harbors aren't being made right.

[Arclight]

Imho early renders are hardly indicative of end quality.

[Einsman]

I only want one thing: I hope you can use the Enigma machine

[karamazovnew]

Originally Posted by GreyOctober

Captain Obvious says: "You can see the conning tower and deck gun casting shadows as well as the ship in the background"

Object shadows can only be as dark as the unlit parts. The conning tower shadow is much darker than the starboard side of the boat. Sure, different paint, proximity to water... but still.

Oh, by the way, can you implement a dry/wet shader? The sub in the image looks too dry. Even ships would look nice as they have wet metal above their waterline.

[tonschk]

Originally Posted by Racerboy

I do see some problems on the dynamic shadow casting though: look on the right side of the sub where the conning tower is casting the shadow. On the right hand side vertical plane of the sub's hull it's still lit like the rest of the sub - maybe they're factoring in the light reflection from the water but if so then it's biased way too much to the light reflection to me. This is also apparent on the conning tower. I would've expected those two areas to be darker than the rest of the sub since it's having a shadow cast on it. The horizontal planes look like the shadowing casting is working right.
Also just noticed that I can't 'see' through the water like in SHIV - I can't see the hull of the sub underwater. Looks like SH3 rendering there with the sub and ship's hulls. This might be because of the lighting in this particular screenshot but I hope I'm wrong
I'm hoping that the shadow I'm seeing in the background by the ship is the ship - but it could be the crane casting the shadow. It would be nice to have the harbors casting shadows (and correctly). Ultimately it would be great if all objects cast shadows onto other objects AND onto the water. But if they are 'making' the harbors like they did in SH3 this will never happen. Hopefully they've changed the way harbors are 'made'.
Seeing that the dock isn't casting a shadow onto the water tells me that the dynamic shadow casting still isn't working correctly and/or the harbors aren't being made right.

In my opinion UBISOFT edited the screenshot just to add some fake Dynamic Shadows and make the screenshot look a bit more realistic ,because the right side of the sub is NOT darker and the inclination of the light beams of the sun casting the " edited " shadows on the sub have different inclination of the light beams casting the " edited " shadows of the ship , the inclination must be the same because the ship and the sub are very close to each other and both are far away from the sun

You can understand when the Dynamic Shadows are really generated by the game iteslf and not " edited "

Without Dynamic Shadows the game looks dead and lifeless

[L_DOG]

Will the engines actually function (visually) whilst standing in the room with them ?
will there be any electrical fires and smoke in the ship ?
will we have manual control of the radio and gramaphone whilst sitting in the radio room ?
just curious

[maerean_m]

Originally Posted by L_DOG

Will the engines actually function (visually) whilst standing in the room with them ?

Yes, you can see and hear the engine revving up. The engine is huge and it's an awesome sight. Imagine the sound on a quality woofer

will there be any electrical fires and smoke in the ship ?
will we have manual control of the radio and gramophone whilst sitting in the radio room ?

I hope so (by the time of release).

Also, about the dynamic shadows: the presentation at the subsim meeting will put an end to the endless debate:
it has dynamic shadows...
it doesn't...
they're fake...
it has dynamic shadows...
...
[loop indefinitely]