The Silent Hunter IV (Pacific Campaign) WISH-LIST

Think outside the box (my comment refers to beyond just sub games silly).

Thats why I said "choose sides" !

[Harry Buttle]

Originally Posted by Cdre Gibs

The only thing I wish for - is that its not another "US" based game.
I for 1 am getting sick ta death of just about every damn game that comes out you have to play as a bloody yank !

Given that the US WW2 Pac Sub campaign was THE definitive submarine campaign (so far) and that the last 2 WW2 sub games have been about U-Boats, it doesn't seem unreasonable to have one about the US boats now, its also pretty marketable to a massive (US) market.

To go back on topic, I also wouldn't mind seeing ahistorical wolfpacks to make multiplayer co-op easier to implement in a campaign - what I mean is that you could form a pack at Hawaii (for example) and then one commander navigates the pack until it encounters the enemy, the pack reforming after the encounter is resolved.

This would allow you to run multiplayer co-op campaigns from the start of the war - ahistorical, yes - fun, I think so.

It never ceases to amaze me how many ppl never read ALL of some1's post. They see a few lines that get them upset or disagree with and then go off.

I ask you, with todays PC's (and keep in mind that by the time this game comes out more advances in PC tech WILL have taken place), is there any need to limit a game to 2 sides only that a player can use or just 1 side (in the case of SH3/4) ?

Or is there any need to limit a player to the type of Units a player can use in that given side ?

The answer is of course NO. So why should we accept such a limiting factor ?

Plus another thing, for a game to do well these days, Online Multiplay is something that you dont just give a passing thought too. This also will need to be rethought because atm its rather a shoddy affair.

[Harry Buttle]

Originally Posted by Cdre Gibs

It never ceases to amaze me how many ppl never read ALL of some1's post. They see a few lines that get them upset or disagree with and then go off.

I ask you, with todays PC's (and keep in mind that by the time this game comes out more advances in PC tech WILL have taken place), is there any need to limit a game to 2 sides only that a player can use or just 1 side (in the case of SH3/4) ?

Or is there any need to limit a player to the type of Units a player can use in that given side ?

The answer is of course NO. So why should we accept such a limiting factor ?

Plus another thing, for a game to do well these days, Online Multiplay is something that you dont just give a passing thought too. This also will need to be rethought because atm its rather a shoddy affair.

What amazes me is people who post nonsense and are then surprised that people disagree with it.

Why limit to only one side for a game? because it is half the work of doing both sides, if they do both sides, let them sell it as 2 games.

why should we accept that? because it would make sub sims more financially viable.

[CptGrayWolf]

Dynamic Radio Communications!
Make me feel like there's a real war going on out there.

[gdogghenrikson]

Originally Posted by Cdre Gibs

The only thing I wish for - is that its not another "US" based game.
I for 1 am getting sick ta death of just about every damn game that comes out you have to play as a bloody yank !

If we as the player can CHOOSE what side we want to play (or indeed for online to be able to choose between subs and surface elements), then good, if not, I see no point to SH4.

I agree with you 100%

[gdogghenrikson]

I also wish this game is WW1 instead of WW2, WW2 games are a dime a dozen

[Type941]

I want a SIMULATION that tells me how the Japanese and US boats were in the war, and compare them one on one - not a propoganda in a box, Pearl Harbour the movie style...

[CptGrayWolf]

I really don't see the problem with playing a 'yank' as you say. Wasn't the last dynamic submarine simulation featuring US in the pacific, SH1 in DOS back in 1997?
So of course there is a point to SH4.
Go devs! Put me in a Gato/Balao anytime!

[Sniper_1]

While some of us might agree that PC and Console games do have an overwhelming bias towards the US (dammed yankee imperialist cultural hegemony .... :P ), the fact reamins that most of the games are either developed by US companies or for the US market (still regarded as the market to sell into). The situation is somewhat similar to that of Hollywood, it makes films overwhelmingly about US topics/subjects and yet sells them allover the world.

That said, the US submarine campaign against the IJN and the Jap merchant fleet is still the only sucessful submarine campaign in history (in that it emasculated the jap war economy and materially contributed to the victory of the US). For this reason alone i'd buy SH4, plus the fleet boats were magnificent subs, bristling with the allies latest electronic gear by the end of the war.

Sniper_1

[Sniper_1]

While some of us might agree that PC and Console games do have an overwhelming bias towards the US (dammed yankee imperialist cultural hegemony .... :P ), the fact reamins that most of the games are either developed by US companies or for the US market (still regarded as the market to sell into). The situation is somewhat similar to that of Hollywood, it makes films overwhelmingly about US topics/subjects and yet sells them allover the world.

That said, the US submarine campaign against the IJN and the Jap merchant fleet is still the only sucessful submarine campaign in history (in that it emasculated the jap war economy and materially contributed to the victory of the US). For this reason alone i'd buy SH4, plus the fleet boats were magnificent subs, bristling with the allies latest electronic gear by the end of the war.

Sniper_1

[CB..]

being able to select your choice of side would be a major boon--

American British and especailly japanese and german aswell--
i don't think any game has given the player the opportunity to play as a japanese sub commander as yet --? it cannot be any more contraversial than playing as a german u-boat commander surely --i'd be interested to see what feelings this aroused whilst playing--
and of course it would be great to be able to play as a brit commander--(being a brit) and i think with some thought the opportunity for some sort of on-line massively multiplayer campaign would be possible if allied and axis commanders were written in---even without human DD's some sort of comparitive tonnage results could be used to calculate victory or defeat--
perhaps using a moving "front line" marked on the map that moved according to each sides results---basic and a bit cheesy but with massive multiplayer it would be reasonably satisfying

[gdogghenrikson]

i don't think any game has given the player the opportunity to play as a japanese sub commander as yet --? it cannot be any more contraversial than playing as a german u-boat commander surely --i'd be interested to see what feelings this aroused whilst playing--

Contraversial??

[CB..]

Originally Posted by gdogghenrikson

Contraversial??

he he!! that was quick---discuss lol

[gdogghenrikson]

Originally Posted by CB..

he he!! that was quick---discuss lol

Define contraversial