![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
![]() |
#31 | |
Chief
![]() Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 326
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 | |
Born to Run Silent
|
![]() Quote:
thanks Neal |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 |
Pacific Aces Dev Team
|
![]()
Damn, it might be too late now that you have mailed them, but since SCS's main concern was the use of MODERN platforms you could have asked them if they would allow us to implement COLD WAR ones, i.e. those that no modern Navy uses like the Victor III, Alfa, Sturgeon, etc. :hmm:
__________________
One day I will return to sea ... Last edited by Hitman; 11-22-08 at 11:58 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 | |
Master of Defense
![]() Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,502
Downloads: 125
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
(My fantasy: Sonalysts will decide to completely finish DW, update its graphics to the latest state-of-the-art, and fully support community mods, like what ThirdWire has been doing with their Strike Fighters series. Wouldn't that be nice?) ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 |
Loader
![]() Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 89
Downloads: 37
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
standing by for now.
__________________
MAD MARK, FULL SCALE! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 | |
Admiral
![]() Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,320
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
Forget retail, just use the frickkin' internet as independent developers do to distribute DLC. You know, you could from time to time issue a patch to correct the bugs and crashes that still occur in DW, you could sell single models etc... The options are yours to make. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 |
Subsim Diehard
![]() Join Date: May 2006
Location: Texas!
Posts: 971
Downloads: 78
Uploads: 3
|
![]()
SCS could easily not make any statement one way or the other.
That way we would mod in our community yet their *official* customers (the US military) would still be dependent on their official releases for upgrades. IE, the US military would not be using the mods, but we as laypersons will. Seems the ideal solution to me.
__________________
"Seek not to offend or annoy... only to speak the truth"-a wise man |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 |
Silent Hunter
![]() Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Jakarta
Posts: 4,794
Downloads: 89
Uploads: 6
|
![]()
I don't think they are going to be silent. Because they responded to Neal mediation and told him that they were going to have a meeting over it.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 |
Loader
![]() Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 89
Downloads: 37
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
ill believe it when i see it.
__________________
MAD MARK, FULL SCALE! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 | ||
Ocean Warrior
![]() Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,552
Downloads: 33
Uploads: 0
|
![]() Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#41 |
Loader
![]() Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 90
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Yes, it is interesting that it seems SCS could never build their entertainment products more upon developements for the military. Eagle Dynamics has made that step with their new DCS line quite well. Recently they announced that they could port the A-10C they built for a US National Guard desktop simulator over to their commercial DCS line. Obviously with some adjustments to sensitive components, but still to their extremly high quality and realism standart.
But perhaps there also is a different philosophy about protection of data between the military branches. While detailed information about USAF aircraft are quite well available (flight manuals, tactical manuals etc.), even Eagly Dynamics was unable to optain the necessary documentation to simulate USN aircraft (for entertainment). So it sounds plausible to me that the USN would forbid SCS to use platforms developed for them in entertainment software, even if those are not necessary a classification problem. The information restriction of the USN just seem to be tighter than those of the USAF. Unfortunatly for us the USAF does not have ships and subs ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 |
Sea Lord
![]() Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 1,894
Downloads: 6
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
The platforms in question are also much different. The A-10 is a 30 year old close support aircraft. There is nothing that remarkable/need to be classified about its performance. Submarines and naval combat systems/sensors are very different. I bet DCS would run into some trouble trying to get accurate F-22 performance data.
PD Last edited by PeriscopeDepth; 11-24-08 at 04:19 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 |
Admiral
![]() Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,320
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Forgive me if I'm being boneheaded, but wouldn't the classified part be in the database values. Can you qualify a low polygon 3d model classified ? Really ?
If they are so afraid, why don't they let the community make the 3d model/s with the different stations and then SCS would fill in the blanks interfacing the 3d model/stations with the navalsimengine. Win-win for everyone. The modders are not sued because they haven't actually modified anything and SCS is the only one to know how to "integrate" the models with the navalsimengine. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#44 |
Loader
![]() Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 90
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Very true about F-22 and similar aircraft, the are still off limits for many years.
But consider that the A-10C is a very new development of the A-10 with a top moder avionics suite. That ED received permission to publicise the A-10C was quite a surprise, for both the community and ED. It was first estimated that this would not happen for the next 10 years. Other current frontline fighters that ED has the necessary documentation are the F-15C and F-16C. While these are not the newest generation anymore, they still form the bulk of the USAF. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#45 |
Admiral
![]() Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,320
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Well in this case we are dealing with the Silent Service. How ironic isn't it ?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|