Doubts!? Will they release a new Silent Hunter?!

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Obltn Strand

I repeat and rephrase my original question: Can someone give me an estimation what would it cost to make a good subsim?

That's not an easy question to answer because it really depends on the business model of the developer/publisher, and what conditions they are willing to work under. There is also the question of what "good subsim" is and what kind of skills are required for it. There is also the question of what platforms it's developed on, what licenses it might require (for example graphics engines, shaders, development and graphics software etc. cost money), etc. etc. Then there are marketing budgets and testing budgets. Those all can vary widely, depending on the business model adopted.

So the real questions to ask are: 1) What features do you want? What are your priorities? and 2) How are you planning to sell and make money from this?

It's no secret that a lot of what makes games expensive lately are extravagant art budgets (even if game artists themselves are often paid very poorly). All of those pretty graphics we're accustomed to from big-budget games cost a ton of money. They need very large teams to support. They also attract customers. SHIII would not have nearly been as successful had it not looked so good when it first came out. I strongly suspect that even for something like SH5, the art budget runs into 7 digits (i.e. over $1 million).

On the other hand, a couple of guys with no budget can develop a good subsim in the long term. It's not gonna look great and it's going to take them a while, but the actual budget will be very low. The main investment there is not money, but time and work. And as a result, the biggest problem is motivation. At the end of the day, thousands of man-hours of free work are difficult for a developer to justify. And it's very difficult to market a game that doesn't have pretty art.

So I think the problem is not budget at all. The problem is having a business model. Noone right now has a good business model for marketing a new submarine sim. Money isn't a problem in the first place anyway because a group of people can easily obtain business loans for even the most extravagant budget. But how do they make it back and not get burned?

That's the million-dollar question. Ubisoft nailed the answer with SHIII in 2005, but they haven't been able to repeat it since, because SHIII itself changed the market. Throwing money at it isn't really going to solve very much, and Ubi has learned that with SH4/5.

[CCIP]

Otherwise, maybe a simpler answer would be - something to match the current SH games? You'd probably need at least an equivalent of 12-15 people working full time for about 2 years. How much do you figure that would cost? You're probably looking at at least $1 million there. Now add in things these people will need to work - computers, software, office space. Now add licensing fees for technology. Now add a marketing budget. Now add publishing costs.

So the short answer is probably $2-3 million even with modest effort.

But like I said, unless there is a business model, the money is actually irrelevant. Development and funds should fall into place themselves as long as the whole project has a viable market and ways to reach that market. Simply paying someone to create a 'dream game' is inviting a business disaster (and possibly a poor actual game, too).

[Obltn Strand]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Otherwise, maybe a simpler answer would be - something to match the current SH games?

You said it your self.

Originally Posted by CCIP

Honestly, I think the best thing in a sub simulator that most of us would want is simply if it took all of the good features of SHIII, put them together with all the good features of Aces of the Deep, added cutting-edge graphics, a more 'living' submarine crew and interior, a more dynamic world and an AI that can "think" both strategically and tactically, we would all be very happy.

Originally Posted by CCIP

You'd probably need at least an equivalent of 12-15 people working full time for about 2 years. How much do you figure that would cost? You're probably looking at at least $1 million there. Now add in things these people will need to work - computers, software, office space. Now add licensing fees for technology. Now add a marketing budget. Now add publishing costs.

So the short answer is probably $2-3 million even with modest effort.

But like I said, unless there is a business model, the money is actually irrelevant. Development and funds should fall into place themselves as long as the whole project has a viable market and ways to reach that market. Simply paying someone to create a 'dream game' is inviting a business disaster (and possibly a poor actual game, too).

Whish I had funds to make it happen. But as you said "paying someone to create a to create a 'dream game' is inviting a business disaster." Computers aren't my business.

So 2-3 million $ hard cash could make a good submarine simulator. Let's say 20 000 loyalist will preorder one for 50$. That's 1 000 000$ starting fund for a game manufacturer.

So 2-3 million $ hard cash could make a good submarine simulator. Let's say 20 000 loyalist will preorder one for 50$. That's 1 000 000$ starting fund for a game manufacturer.

You would have an easier time getting the political Left and the political Right to unanimously agree on a vision of the future than you would to get 20,000 Sub Simmer's to agree on a vision of the ideal submarine simulation and back it with hard cash on spec.

Enjoy your fantasy; CCIP's analysis is probably quite accurate and there is no business case for another chapter of the Silent Hunter franchise for the foreseeable future.

[RICH12ACE]

why not have british subs of ww2 for SH6

[Obltn Strand]

Originally Posted by Randomizer

You would have an easier time getting the political Left and the political Right to unanimously agree on a vision of the future than you would to get 20,000 Sub Simmer's to agree on a vision of the ideal submarine simulation and back it with hard cash on spec.

No need for unanimously agreement. Just 50$ spent on pre order. I and many others have lost more to gambling.

Originally Posted by Randomizer

Enjoy your fantasy; CCIP's analysis is probably quite accurate and there is no business case for another chapter of the Silent Hunter franchise for the foreseeable future.

My intententions were not to pressure another chapter in the silent hunter franchise.

CCIP's analysis proves a good subsim can be made with profit. Only problem is to make game developer to understand this. You call it fantasy I call it innovation. With current attitude next subsim will come out in ten years and has 1 in 2 chance to be crappy.

Originally Posted by Obltn Strand

No need for unanimously agreement. Just 50$ spent on pre order. I and many others have lost more to gambling.

My intententions were not to pressure another chapter in the silent hunter franchise.

CCIP's analysis proves a good subsim can be made with profit. Only problem is to make game developer to understand this. You call it fantasy I call it innovation. With current attitude next subsim will come out in ten years and has 1 in 2 chance to be crappy.

You must have missed the part where he wrote:

So I think the problem is not budget at all. The problem is having a business model. No one right now has a good business model for marketing a new submarine sim. Money isn't a problem in the first place anyway because a group of people can easily obtain business loans for even the most extravagant budget. But how do they make it back and not get burned?

I will sit in at a poker game prepared to lose it all but really planning on coming out ahead. However the problems involved in creating a "good" subsim are huge starting with the unpleasant fact that there is no agreement as to what "good" actually means.

People still play Aces of the Deep and tolerate the primitive graphics and difficulties encountered running it on current operating systems because in many respects the gameplay provides the best available simulation of the U-Boat war.

Picture a graphically poor subsim with real physics, weather and damage simulation, an interactive BdU with shadowing and wolfpacks, full technical U-Boat management including simulated targeting and task delegation to a computer "crew", a realistic and challenging AI that evolves over the course of the war, historically reasonable career with historical flotillas and convoys using historical routes on real dates. This might be close to an ideal subsim for some but without the high-end graphics it would never be more than a minor niche in the gaming world.

Such a simulation is certainly possible but the chances of a mainstream company doing it is vanishingly small as is the potential market. On the other hand, a decision to forgo a sound and light spectacular would allow a small company to produce something like this since without a sophisticated graphics engine, the algorithms could be relatively straight forward to write code for and the historical data is readily available.

A subsim like this however "good" the potential game play is doomed as a commercial failure since, as we have seen with SH5, for the great majority here it's mostly about the graphics. It has been left to the very talented and dedicated Modding Community to enhance game play that should have been incorporated by the publisher.

Graphics are expensive and developer time finite so we have seen subsims steadily shed game play (read simulation) features while becoming more graphically impressive. It is probably safe to say that you cannot have it all and the divergence between "simulation" and "game" is growing for many reasons that need not be repeated here.

Any "SH6" would have to come from UBISoft who have pretty much burned their bridges in the subsim community. They own the Silent Hunter trademark and unless they sell or licence it out there can be no more Silent Hunter games unless they produce it. Of course any SH6 would automatically incorporate their UBI Play DRM scheme that proved so popular with SH5's release.

Get 20k members of the community to agree on the features to be incorporated into the next generation subsim AND pony up $50.00 (or equivalent) each to start development and I will gladly, humbly and publicly acknowledge that I am entirely wrong and kick in my ante. Good luck with that.

The subject of what makes a "good" subsim is one that is certainly worthy of discussing since there are so many points of view. However, the consistent pining for an SH6 to be produced by "someone" as if by magic and without a shred of realistic assessment of the challenges involved grows increasingly tiresome. There is nothing innovative in ignoring the real world.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Obltn Strand

No need for unanimously agreement. Just 50$ spent on pre order. I and many others have lost more to gambling.

Pre-orders are usually based on a product nearing completion. Giving someone any amount of money based on a promise of what might be two years down the road is folly. If I had the money I'd fund it myself, but I'd also be on top of it from start to finish. If someone shows a plan and asks for investors, maybe. But pay for the finished product before it's even planned, let alone started? No chance.

[Jimbuna]

I know and understand where your coming from Obltn Strand but my position would be the same as Steve.

[VONHARRIS]

I have to agree with Jimbuna and Sailor Steve on that one.
I would also to add the following:
Why do we even discuss about a SH6 series?
After all this modding done to SH3 the game has changed completely and I think it is very close to a good subsim.
Sometimes it becomes unstable but I can live with it.
Moreover , I don't like SH4 or SH5 at all despite their better graphics!

[Fish In The Water]

Originally Posted by VONHARRIS

Moreover , I don't like SH4 or SH5 at all despite their better graphics!

I hear you on that one. The eye candy may be nice but they lack the depressing mood (i.e. grit) of SH3. For me that's the make or break factor.

[Jimbuna]

Still early days for SH5.

Given time and a similar amount of effort as that what was given to SH3 and you just never know what you'll end up with.

[Victor Schutze]

"Get 20k members of the community to agree on the features to be incorporated into the next generation subsim AND pony up $50.00 (or equivalent) each to start development"

I am willing to do so.

"Giving someone any amount of money based on a promise of what might be two years down the road is folly"

This is no coincidence: I am crazy about SH3. I just spent $100 on a new PSU.
I can invest $50 now and another $50 at a later date on a good u-boat sim.

"graphically good subsim with real physics, weather and damage simulation, an interactive BdU with shadowing and wolfpacks, full technical U-Boat management including simulated targeting and task delegation to a computer "crew", a realistic and challenging AI that evolves over the course of the war, historically reasonable career with historical flotillas and convoys using historical routes on real dates."

PRICELESS!

20,000 crazies like me? Yes, we can find them. This should not be difficult to find. We already have one: just 19,999 to go.

Nowadays people "burn" far more money on all sorts of nonsense.

Who else with me?

[PappyCain]

silly stuff IMHO. Perhaps build a subsim all in one package that includes a mission specific bespoke computer shaped like a Uboat conning tower, include a diesel fume generator, a barf, smoke, and soiled clothes stink machine, maggots that slink out of the unit, gimbal the screen, have a refillable blood squirt port, salt water spray nozzles, oh yeah ... an auto lock on your toilet door so you cannot use it when you please... only 22K per unit.

Me, I hate computers, the constant upgrades, the new OS requirements, bigger this and larger that ... I am very pleased with SH3 and Commander and the talented modders efforts. Got to run, tertiary bilge pump bearing broke and oily water on my imported Ming Dynasty rug from WalMart...

^ What he says; no further comment is necessary.