DW vs Harpoon 3

[SeaQueen]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

I did't play Harpoon. So it is something like Fleet command, right ?

Fleet command for minimalists. It has no 3D graphics. The best way to describe the interface is like Microprose's Red Storm Rising but with the Motif Windows Manager.

The databases are probably the most extensive of any wargame, and the guys who maintain it are really good about responding to suggestions. For example, I didn't like that they didn't include aircraft stores on the LPD-17. Since a MAGTF's Aviation Combat Element is mission tailored, it should be able to carry AH-1s, UH-1s, CH-53s, or MH-60S, without having to redeploy them to an LHD to get them resupplied. They fixed that problem very promptly.

They basically devote all the effort into improving the content of the sim instead of the fancy graphics. The result is a simulation where you really have the opportunity to think about an awful lot of stuff that a real commander of a small fleet would have to think about.

[Dr.Sid]

Well .. theoretically there is nothing impossible on making sim with both graphics and database, especially if it is mod-friendly.

[SeaQueen]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

Well .. theoretically there is nothing impossible on making sim with both graphics and database, especially if it is mod-friendly.

The thing is, in reality, game developers can only spend so much time building 3D models, and if every platform in the game has to have a 3D model for it, then the extent of the database is limited by the number of 3D models. I honestly think the drive for graphics sometimes really limits what's possible in gaming. Naval simulations are a particularly striking example of that. Go on the web and try to find nice shape files for ships. They're hard to come by and typically quite expensive. It takes a lot of effort to make really nice 3D graphics.

In truth, naval sims don't need a lot of 3d graphics. Most of the warfare is conducted over the horizon. This isn't to say that there isn't room for UAVs, electro optics, infrared sensors, synthetic aperture radars and even mark 1 mod 0 eyeballs, but I don't think one loses a lot by not having amazing graphics in the case of naval sims. In a submarine I spend a small fraction of my time looking through the periscope. In the FFG, I mostly look at the radar and ESM screens. It's nice to have, but it's sort of a fancy extra. Let's face it, naval warfare is an awful lot of sailing around looking at nothing. Graphics in a naval sim, to me, are something I can take or leave.

If the naval sim DOES have 3D graphics in it, they better be really great. If they're really great, then they add a lot to the feel of the sim (it's nice to be able to look out of the bridge wing or watch a torpedo hit a target), but only if the content is there. If the content isn't there, then the feel will be wrong no matter what the graphics are like. If the choice has to be made, I'd rather them concentrate on making a terrific sensor and weapons models or making the AI behave smartly over graphics, and if they do feel like they've done everything possible to make the AI, radar, and sonar as great as they can possibly be THEN they should worry about graphics and then they better be ABSOLUTELY AMAZING.

I guess that's what makes naval sims kind of hard to make...

[SaxMan]

I have to jump in here and say that I wholeheartedly agree with SeaQueen's statements - graphics are nice to have, but it's all about the database and engine (AI, etc).
And of course I have to add my plug about having more driveables/flyables/operables in the sim. I can't play any game without wondering what it's like to operate the enemy sub/ship/airplane/tank/whatever. If anyone remembers Janes Fighter's Anthology, it was easily extensible in this manner. By certain manipulation of the save files and other methods I don't offhand remember, you could fly or drive practically anything in the sim - all the planes and most of the ground vehicles. Now it was lower fidelity than what we have here in DW but still kinda cool in a way Playing a SAM (especially with a modified database) was the ultimate, given sufficiently crowded skies (easily done with the mission editor).