Gameplay or Realism? Which do you prefer?

[Excalibur Bane]

Just out of curiosity, is anyone planning on mods that enhance gameplay, not realism? I know the handful of us that actually view this as a game are few in number, but it sure would be a welcome addition.

I've applied lots of custom changes but there is a limit to what I can do unfortunately, I have a problem with numbers so my ability to mod is severely limited. Otherwise I'd make my own FuB (Fun U-Boat) mod.

Wrap up all of Fubar's nice sub skins, toss in that shell damage texture, a few other things. Hmm. That sort of thing. Stuff that isn't necessarily realistic but would be fun, nonetheless. "What if" scenarios I guess. I've always found it to be more engaging to play an alternate timeline then simply relive existing events. For example, what if the XXI along with the rest of the advanced U-boats had been more of a priority and did in fact come in to service at a point in the war when they would have made a difference? Would England have fallen? Or would the suprerior numbers of the combined forces of the Allies achieved victory anyway?

Anyway, just my thoughts.

[P_Funk]

I'm not sure if SH3 permits that kind of radical change to the game design; at least not without making some very laborious changes. You could easily make the XXI available earlier on in the campaign. I imagine you could make it totally different but you'd need a team of people working for a long time (almost like a development team working for a major company.... :hmm: )

[Trav_R]

I prefer mostly realism, but not to the point where the game isn't fun anymore.

[Marhkimov]

Originally Posted by Trav_R

I prefer mostly realism, but not to the point where the game isn't fun anymore.

Agreed.

[jason210]

I prefer realism too, that's why I've started using RUb. SHIII is very good, and with RUb can seem quite realistic.

But any future sub-sim would require a more powerful 3D-engine in order to seem "realistic". Active crew, and 1st person camera walkthrough movement are things that I personally miss, and would like to see in the next generation of sims. Also, I would like to see functional, controllable sub-systems. We should be able to operate valves and hydroplanes, engines, rudders and a range of similar items manually if we wish to. Not on 2D panels, but proper 3D equipment. Then there's the opening and closing of hatches and torpedo tubes.

One should be able to choose betweenn crew management ofl equiopment and controls, and 1st person management. There could be a range of crew management templates to use.

Finally, let's not forget physics. Anyone who's seen Half-Life 2 will know what I mean.

Open ended architecture software design should be used, to allow the easy addition of developers' models and "panels", as we have seen happen with great success in MSFS for the last ten years.

[Myszkin]

Realism, Realism, Realism!!!

Why? Because in REAL simulations realism=gameplay. Have you ever seen cool unrealistic simulation?

[gdogghenrikson]

Originally Posted by Trav_R

I prefer mostly realism, but not to the point where the game isn't fun anymore.

Good call

[Detritus]

Originally Posted by gdogghenrikson

Good call

Ditto. I prefer realism by making some things harder but also vice versa, using mods and such to cut down some unrealistic features. Different strokes for different folks and that's the way it should be, too.

[wetwarev7]

I prefer mostly realism, but every now and then(if I've been having a bad day) I like to do something like decrease the loading times for the deck gun to .5 sec or so, and just have at it!!! I've a special save game in a not-well defended convoy just for this....

[lumat83]

Originally Posted by Trav_R

I prefer mostly realism, but not to the point where the game isn't fun anymore.

Agree too

[oRGy]

I prefer realism that is interesting and teaches me something. Realism that is laborious and wastes my time I do not like.

For example, the endlos waiting around in real life as you watch your sub icon crawl along the screen is 'realistic' in the sense that indeed this is what it was like for sub crews, i.e. mostly long patrols of boredom.

However, Das Boot depicts this same process but in a more interesting way - you are engrossed in the atmosphere, the character development, and so forth, whereas in SH3 you are simply bored.

If I was designing SH3, that whole sequence would be cut and you'd either be managing/interacting with your crew actively (think black and white 2 rather than current SH3), looking around your boat etc, reading something interesting, or you'd be skipped to the next important event - which could be either a destroyer 200m off the port bow, an engine failure, a crew problem, etc... None of this waiting around pointlessly anyway.

[CCIP]

Wha?

For me,

Realism == Gameplay

...where, mind you,
Realism =/= Reality

I think people misunderstand the latter point often, and end up with some sort of strange perception that realism is supposed to mean boredom and stress. It's not. But for me, the game has absolutely no value as an arcade shooter; it has to reflect certain situations with the highest degree of accuracy possible. I cringe at the idea of playing a WWII simulator where all I get to do is run around in a Type XXI for the whole war, shooting up cruisers with my flak guns. To me, that's not even close to being "fun" - it's stupid.

[CWorth]

Originally Posted by Trav_R

I prefer mostly realism, but not to the point where the game isn't fun anymore.

Agreed..I like realism but to much realism kills the fun of the game.

I use the RUB mod w/SH3Commander....just modified to un-real it a little bit.

[Hartmann]

I like a good balance simulation vs game.

Too much realism could kill the fun

[K-61]

For me, realism in a game is enjoyable to the point where I have to behave in a logical manner and in accordance with historical precedent. For example, I should have to manage my fuel so that I do not run out mid-patrol and can then just magically sidestep my poor management by hitting the escape key.

When realism becomes tedious then it takes away from the enjoyment of the game. In the game's original crew fatigue model I as commander of the boat have to micromanage my crew and put them to bed like the mother of a three year old. Since I am the captain on a boat full of adults, I would like such things to run automatically in the background. The only time I should be concerned is when the general morale and fatigue of the crew becomes operationally relevant. If I have been at sea for two months, then as the commander it should then be a factor in my decision making. Since the crew is getting worn down I may decide it is time to return to base.

I appreciate that some players would like the option of managing subsystems in the boat. I don't mind, as long as that sort of thing is optional. As the commander of the boat, it is not my duty to manipulate valves and dive planes. It takes the combined efforts of many crew members to operate the boat, I just have to give the appropriate orders.

If the balance can be achieved whereby I perform akin to historical commanders, then I think that the game succeeds. If I get my clock cleaned by trying to engage a destroyer in a gunnery duel, then I think that is realistic. Anything else is an arcade game.