SH5, shorter and more simplified than ever before? - Page 2

IanC · 01-22-10, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

Well, considering no one has played the game, that's hard to say. Maybe you mean "it's a pretty good summing up of what everyone thinks the game will be".

You can go copy and paste that answer in many threads going on right now.

MRV · 01-22-10, 09:24 AM

Ok, I posted so much about distrust in publishers and SH5 being the ultimative CoD-style "nerd exploitation" the way its done with games like Star Trek Online. "Just post a beautiful screenshot of a ship in the internet and enough geeks are going to buy the game" I won't repeat this now.

I still don't get it how they want to include all these RPG-elements with crew storytelling into a dynamic campaign...If, based on a dynamic choice, I get strafed by a hurricane, my watchman is dead, there goes his story....

My new (old) hope after all this is, like I think I said with SH3 before, the merged install option like in IL 2 Sturmovik. Although I think what were "patches" in IL2 will be "DLC" by now.

Maddox Software started with 3 static campaigns and a few planes, but they were very accurately modeled for the time. Although it had its limitations it definitely was a true SIMULATION with all/most realism switched on.

after a few patches with brought us a few more aircraft to choose from, there was Forgotten Battles, with new dynamic campaigns (pretty limited because it was around 2003 i think.) and even more planes, including heavy bombers.

It went on and went on, with Pacific Fighters it included the PTO, right now with IL2 1946 version 4.09m we have an almost complete simulation of WW2 air warfare, graphics were improved with each version so even if the engine is outdated by now it still does not feel and look that way. Additionally there is a modding community, maybe a bit smaller than with SH3, but very active and creative. Someone even programmed an improved dynamic campaign generator.

Thats what I hope for in SH 5 now, original game being basic release, patches adding type II and later Type IX, an addon "the last battles" covering the struggle for survival from 1943 on. Later new bases added and with the next release "Pacific Subs" and the next addon is maybe "Destroyer Command 2"

how about this ubisoft?

Kapitanleutnant · 01-22-10, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

Maybe you mean "it's a pretty good summing up of what everyone thinks the game will be".

I stand corrected.

TDK1044 · 01-22-10, 12:57 PM

Personally, the VII has always been my preferred sub, so selfishly I have no problem with that being the featured sub in the game. As for the career ending in May 1943......not by the time Lurker has finished with it it won't.

I'm more concerned with things like AA, AF, Dynamic Shadows, cloud textures, water look and texture, does the sub feel like it's stuck on rails, will there be realistic rain/sleet effects etc.

paxhispanica · 01-22-10, 01:09 PM

I think that this game is comprised of several parts. All of them important, but everyone has his prefered ones:

+Eye candy graphics (shadows, AA,...)
+Good enviroment (rough seas, high waves, Storms,...)
+Simulation (to be able to operate the TDC, to have the possibility of draw an attack solution (having good instruments e. g. a good ruler) and to be able to make annotations on the chart, to have the possibility of operating the engines (only electrical at surface, or both), etc...
+Accurate anti submarine warfare (RAF Coastal command with Leigh Lights, destroyers with limited depth charges,...)
+Good water dynamics (currents displacing your sub, dynamic thermal layers, etc ...
+ A real campaign (not a RAMBO like campaign (my sub against the Royal Navy)

If the improvements on SHV are only related to walk and talk with my crew, then Ubisoft will have a curious "surprise".

01-22-10, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TDK1044

I'm more concerned with things like AA, AF, Dynamic Shadows, cloud textures, water look and texture, does the sub feel like it's stuck on rails, will there be realistic rain/sleet effects etc.

My opposite, as this is exactly the stuff I don't worry about.
To each is own.

I want my IXs, and the rest of the war.

SteamWake · 01-22-10, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lanzfeld

Why is this a sticky?

Good question...

Dallas · 01-22-10, 03:14 PM

I think Ubi is playing it safe. If the investment in SH5 and the Type VII go well, then I see add on's with other types coming forth and probably a sequel to cover the later half of the war. Maybe even see a Seehund. At any rate, I will get the Sim. I do look forward to the updated graphics and the ability to interact with the crew and see all of the sub.

Deep Source · 01-22-10, 04:06 PM

VII type only? 1943 end? XXI Century HUD? OK

Three words for UBI.

RELEASE A SDK PLEASE.

Fligth Simulator have a SDK.
Trainz Simulator 2009 have a world builder.
The Sims 3 have a world builder (soon a "sim creator").

But Silent Hunter have a misery "campaing layer editor".

The silent hunter modder's are a good people. But not god's. These guy's needs tools.

Thanks for mod's GWX TEAM, Luker, Decimus, thanks to all.

jdkbph · 01-22-10, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sk065

As for a crew (or cast) of characters - I can see this becoming stale very quickly. There is only so much story driven dialogue that will get repeated and repeated regardless of how dynamic the campaign is..

Yeah, there's a reason why no one reads books any more... movies are only 2 hours long. Hope against hope that this reason is not the driving force behind UBI's "re-imagined" sub sim, aka SH5.

JD

THE_MASK · 01-23-10, 03:55 PM

SH5 , more complex than SH3 with 160 ports etc .

01-23-10, 03:58 PM

Not quite sure whats going on over there at UBI.

While I'm impressed with some of the additions they have made to the 'sim' there are some blaring shortcommings to SH5.

Lets get over all this talk about 'well, we havn't played it'. Well, played or not.. who is the genious over there that decided the war for the U-Boats ends in 1943? And.... errr, why does he still have a job? And who agreed to this?

SH3 with some mod enhancements became quite a fantastic experience. A FULL experience. Half the enjoyment was dealing with new Allied technology that, as time progressed, so did the challenge. Surviving in the later years was difficult at best, but those encounters that had you on the edge of your seat for 5-18 hours resulting in survival and a return to port with a smashed up boat were exhilerating.

So we have half a war.

The focus on just the type VII (personally all I use, but still) is another blatant brain fart. We are looking for a U-Boat Sim, played in a Simulated war... I'm sure the entire community can vouch for that. Omitting the Type IX, at the very least is irresponsible, never mind all the other sub types.

Like really.... who comes up with these ideas?

This had so much premise, until they turned it into Diet Silent Hunter V - Half the War, even less Submarines.

Dissapointed.

Rykaird · 01-23-10, 08:30 PM

Has anyone seen a screenshot of the TDC yet? My biggest concern is that the "thing" in the periscope IS the TDC.

One of the immersion factors in SH3 that was diluted for me in SH4 was the ability to directly control the equipment through the switches, knobs, and toggles on the equipment itself, rather than through a virtual interface.

I'm hoping the screenshot of the torpedo interface in the video walkthrough is the "simplified" interface for folks on lower realism settings.

Highbury · 01-24-10, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kptlt_Lynch

The focus on just the type VII (personally all I use, but still) is another blatant brain fart. We are looking for a U-Boat Sim

Alot of true simulators deal with only one vehicle. It is just games that get labeled as simulators (read: IL-2) that make people think a dev team can accurately simulate 40+ vehicles in a cost effective and timely manner. Sure we are talking a much smaller number then IL-2 but you can be sure alot more goes into building a full Type VII then one of Oleg's egg-shell plane models. DCS Black Shark is hailed as one of the best sims out for flight, and it has one vehicle. I have never heard complaints about that... maybe because that one vehicle is in the name... perhaps Ubi should have titled this "U-Boot Type VII: Silent Hunter V" lol

I will be very sad with no Type IIs (I have twice survived the war in them, and used nothing but IIs and VIIb's in SH3 or SH4 ATO mods.. I am a sucker for the early crap) but I can see the sense in focusing on one sub, considering they are supposed to be recreating the whole interior, I think focusing on one is a good plan, do the rest as add-ons.

As for the war ending in '43... makes no sense to me, but I am sure at some point they sat down made a decision on it. You can bet it was a weighing of pros and cons. Unless I know what was on the list for pros and cons then I can't really call it a stupid decision, just an unfortunate one. If the game really has "story" perhaps there is just so damn much of it that they can't write it all before Dec 2010 lol.. that is just speculating but there are many possible reasons.

Ishigami · 01-24-10, 07:08 AM

I don’t think that flight simulators are good role model for naval simulations.
Just take a look at some of the really good flight simulators out there like the PMDG 747-400, MD-11 or LevelD 767 and you just have to admit the difference in depth and accuracy compared to Silent Hunter submarines or ships from Ship Simulator.
That said a KptLt probably never operated e.g. diving rudder himself so why should the player?
I’m willingly to give up on the idea to operate everything myself but I want at least a good imitation of the performance and behavior like it is done for the cars in Gran Turismo.
With that I could have fun to compute target solutions, to intercept convoys or evading escorts rather than operating the systems themselves given that the AI and environment behave realistically.
So I rather have detailed ocean layers and damage models, realistic AI behavior, drifts, waves and stuff like that instead of e.g. useable vents in the command room.
However UbiSoft made the first mistake regarding this by using a cylindrical world instead of a spherical one. Leading me to believe that SH5 is still going for the eye candy instead of fixing some of the “broken” gameplay elements of its predecessors.

01-22-10, 04:06 PM	#24
Deep Source Bosun Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 63 Downloads: 170 Uploads: 0	VII type only? 1943 end? XXI Century HUD? OK Three words for UBI. RELEASE A SDK PLEASE. Fligth Simulator have a SDK. Trainz Simulator 2009 have a world builder. The Sims 3 have a world builder (soon a "sim creator"). But Silent Hunter have a misery "campaing layer editor". The silent hunter modder's are a good people. But not god's. These guy's needs tools. Thanks for mod's GWX TEAM, Luker, Decimus, thanks to all. __________________ SAY: Bolinho de Bacalhau - Chucrute - Esfigmomanômetro.

01-22-10, 09:24 AM	#17
MRV Frogman Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 296 Downloads: 89 Uploads: 0	Ok, I posted so much about distrust in publishers and SH5 being the ultimative CoD-style "nerd exploitation" the way its done with games like Star Trek Online. "Just post a beautiful screenshot of a ship in the internet and enough geeks are going to buy the game" I won't repeat this now. I still don't get it how they want to include all these RPG-elements with crew storytelling into a dynamic campaign...If, based on a dynamic choice, I get strafed by a hurricane, my watchman is dead, there goes his story.... My new (old) hope after all this is, like I think I said with SH3 before, the merged install option like in IL 2 Sturmovik. Although I think what were "patches" in IL2 will be "DLC" by now. Maddox Software started with 3 static campaigns and a few planes, but they were very accurately modeled for the time. Although it had its limitations it definitely was a true SIMULATION with all/most realism switched on. after a few patches with brought us a few more aircraft to choose from, there was Forgotten Battles, with new dynamic campaigns (pretty limited because it was around 2003 i think.) and even more planes, including heavy bombers. It went on and went on, with Pacific Fighters it included the PTO, right now with IL2 1946 version 4.09m we have an almost complete simulation of WW2 air warfare, graphics were improved with each version so even if the engine is outdated by now it still does not feel and look that way. Additionally there is a modding community, maybe a bit smaller than with SH3, but very active and creative. Someone even programmed an improved dynamic campaign generator. Thats what I hope for in SH 5 now, original game being basic release, patches adding type II and later Type IX, an addon "the last battles" covering the struggle for survival from 1943 on. Later new bases added and with the next release "Pacific Subs" and the next addon is maybe "Destroyer Command 2" how about this ubisoft?

01-22-10, 12:57 PM	#19
TDK1044 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 2,674 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	Personally, the VII has always been my preferred sub, so selfishly I have no problem with that being the featured sub in the game. As for the career ending in May 1943......not by the time Lurker has finished with it it won't. I'm more concerned with things like AA, AF, Dynamic Shadows, cloud textures, water look and texture, does the sub feel like it's stuck on rails, will there be realistic rain/sleet effects etc.

01-22-10, 01:09 PM	#20
paxhispanica Swabbie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Spain Posts: 11 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	I think that this game is comprised of several parts. All of them important, but everyone has his prefered ones: +Eye candy graphics (shadows, AA,...) +Good enviroment (rough seas, high waves, Storms,...) +Simulation (to be able to operate the TDC, to have the possibility of draw an attack solution (having good instruments e. g. a good ruler) and to be able to make annotations on the chart, to have the possibility of operating the engines (only electrical at surface, or both), etc... +Accurate anti submarine warfare (RAF Coastal command with Leigh Lights, destroyers with limited depth charges,...) +Good water dynamics (currents displacing your sub, dynamic thermal layers, etc ... + A real campaign (not a RAMBO like campaign (my sub against the Royal Navy) If the improvements on SHV are only related to walk and talk with my crew, then Ubisoft will have a curious "surprise".

01-22-10, 03:14 PM	#23
Dallas Swabbie Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 7 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	I think Ubi is playing it safe. If the investment in SH5 and the Type VII go well, then I see add on's with other types coming forth and probably a sequel to cover the later half of the war. Maybe even see a Seehund. At any rate, I will get the Sim. I do look forward to the updated graphics and the ability to interact with the crew and see all of the sub.

01-23-10, 03:55 PM	#26
THE_MASK Ace of the deep . Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 9,226 Downloads: 901 Uploads: 73	SH5 , more complex than SH3 with 160 ports etc .

01-23-10, 03:58 PM	#27
Kptlt_Lynch Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Not quite sure whats going on over there at UBI. While I'm impressed with some of the additions they have made to the 'sim' there are some blaring shortcommings to SH5. Lets get over all this talk about 'well, we havn't played it'. Well, played or not.. who is the genious over there that decided the war for the U-Boats ends in 1943? And.... errr, why does he still have a job? And who agreed to this? SH3 with some mod enhancements became quite a fantastic experience. A FULL experience. Half the enjoyment was dealing with new Allied technology that, as time progressed, so did the challenge. Surviving in the later years was difficult at best, but those encounters that had you on the edge of your seat for 5-18 hours resulting in survival and a return to port with a smashed up boat were exhilerating. So we have half a war. The focus on just the type VII (personally all I use, but still) is another blatant brain fart. We are looking for a U-Boat Sim, played in a Simulated war... I'm sure the entire community can vouch for that. Omitting the Type IX, at the very least is irresponsible, never mind all the other sub types. Like really.... who comes up with these ideas? This had so much premise, until they turned it into Diet Silent Hunter V - Half the War, even less Submarines. Dissapointed.

01-23-10, 08:30 PM	#28
Rykaird Weps Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 356 Downloads: 36 Uploads: 0	Has anyone seen a screenshot of the TDC yet? My biggest concern is that the "thing" in the periscope IS the TDC. One of the immersion factors in SH3 that was diluted for me in SH4 was the ability to directly control the equipment through the switches, knobs, and toggles on the equipment itself, rather than through a virtual interface. I'm hoping the screenshot of the torpedo interface in the video walkthrough is the "simplified" interface for folks on lower realism settings.

01-24-10, 07:08 AM	#30
Ishigami Navy Dude Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 177 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	I don’t think that flight simulators are good role model for naval simulations. Just take a look at some of the really good flight simulators out there like the PMDG 747-400, MD-11 or LevelD 767 and you just have to admit the difference in depth and accuracy compared to Silent Hunter submarines or ships from Ship Simulator. That said a KptLt probably never operated e.g. diving rudder himself so why should the player? I’m willingly to give up on the idea to operate everything myself but I want at least a good imitation of the performance and behavior like it is done for the cars in Gran Turismo. With that I could have fun to compute target solutions, to intercept convoys or evading escorts rather than operating the systems themselves given that the AI and environment behave realistically. So I rather have detailed ocean layers and damage models, realistic AI behavior, drifts, waves and stuff like that instead of e.g. useable vents in the command room. However UbiSoft made the first mistake regarding this by using a cylindrical world instead of a spherical one. Leading me to believe that SH5 is still going for the eye candy instead of fixing some of the “broken” gameplay elements of its predecessors.