Topic: Future possiblities for Ship Simulator Extremes? (Read 18267 times)

1st Commander · « **on:** January 10, 2011, 06:12:59 »

Is there any plans by VStep in the future to combine the functionality of Nautis by VStep, VStep Rescue Simulator, and VStep Dry Bulk Crane Simulator into one great package for Ship Simulator Extremes as a possible update?

Tinchu · « **Reply #1 on:** January 12, 2011, 20:32:33 »

Hello 1st Commander. It`s not the first time I`ve proposed this possibility. VStep always says that Ship Simulator and Nautis are two products totally differents. All of us are thinking about Flight Simulator; obviously. We are very familiarized with that philosophy and the structure of Ship Simulator is different; or that is VStep says. Visiting the VStep`s web and the videos about their products is not difficult to deduce they are making their products with the same "software tools".

I personally think there is a problem about marketing and image. They are working for two "market niches" but they don`t want both of them become intermingled.

Surely some Global Moderator will contradict me immediately. I`m not discrediting VStep. It will be a strategy very good for them. But many of us can`t avoid our letdown and our frustration contemplating those nice pictures included in your post.

Mad_Fred · « **Reply #2 on:** January 13, 2011, 00:40:07 »

So adding thousands of dollars worth of features and functions from nautis, amongst others, into a 40 euro game you mean?

What did everyone have in mind as a possible price for this addon then?

mvsmith · « **Reply #3 on:** January 13, 2011, 01:38:15 »

You might remind him, Fred, that the forty Euros is in addition to a few thousand for a separate computer to drive each of the exterior screens in his first picture.

1st Commander · « **Reply #4 on:** January 13, 2011, 08:55:00 »

Yes. We will pay for these seperate addons. Think an additional 40 euros X 500,000 people vs. only a handfull of sales with nautis....

Doesn't matter, money is money right?. Better to add these additions to Ship Simulator then no money at all without, eh?

Let's call it "Ship Simulator Extremes Addon Pack 1"

Do it!

Third Mate · « **Reply #5 on:** January 13, 2011, 09:14:54 »

Quote from: mvsmith on January 13, 2011, 01:38:15

You might remind him, Fred, that the forty Euros is in addition to a few thousand for a separate computer to drive each of the exterior screens in his first picture.

If you take Silent hunter 5 which was developed by Ubisoft Romania. I mean if you look at the detail in that game, they have not left anything out went on as normal. So what they did there is went hardcore in everything, put all the money necessary and to pay the bills, they let the money made from the sales do all the talk.

Mad_Fred · « **Reply #6 on:** January 13, 2011, 12:07:52 »

Quote from: 1st Commander on January 13, 2011, 08:55:00

Yes. We will pay for these seperate addons. Think an additional 40 euros X 500,000 people vs. only a handfull of sales with nautis....

Doesn't matter, money is money right?. Better to add these additions to Ship Simulator then no money at all without, eh?

Let's call it "Ship Simulator Extremes Addon Pack 1"

Do it!

No what I meant was.. nautis costs many thousands.. and you expect to have that included in a 40 euro game?

Bit much to hope for.

@Third Mate.. SH5 is a nice bit of eyecandy.. but it's not the worst one in the series for nothing.

It's not hardcore, it's bugged and lacking in many ways and UBI has been disgraceful about it when it failed miserably and left their fans out in the cold. You should see those fora..

SH4 and SH3 even too, are much better and much more elaborate. But we've been over that before.

Third Mate · « **Reply #7 on:** January 13, 2011, 13:06:15 »

Quote from: Mad_Fred on January 13, 2011, 12:07:52

No what I meant was.. nautis costs many thousands.. and you expect to have that included in a 40 euro game?

Bit much to hope for.

@Third Mate.. SH5 is a nice bit of eyecandy.. but it's not the worst one in the series for nothing.

It's not hardcore, it's bugged and lacking in many ways and UBI has been disgraceful about it when it failed miserably and left their fans out in the cold. You should see those fora..

SH4 and SH3 even too, are much better and much more elaborate. But we've been over that before.

Weird I had no clue

Tinchu · « **Reply #8 on:** January 13, 2011, 20:31:59 »

The programs are made in modular way. VStep did it, for instead when they created an add-on for Ship Simulator 2008 called New Horizons; with new ships and some new scenery; and we paid money for it gladly. Surely Ship Simulator Professional has been made in modular way. We don`t want many of those modules. I don`t want to have giant screens to see the external images. I don`t want the NMEA 183 to link my computer with external hardware devices like radars. I don`t want the possibility to link my computer with motion platforms. I don`t need the console for instructors. All those functions and performances will have their cost among the others, and I don`t need them.

But we`d like a better equipment for command bridge. The possibility to syntonized radio frequencies for communications; introducing the features using the mouse or the keyboard or some hardware device customizable for the user.

The simulation of aircrafts, ships, military devices, need create the environment. Need the operative procedures... We don`t need the sofisticated and intensive physics used in professional simulators. Even for me the graphics are good. This is ship simulator not a car simulator or aircraft simulator and I don`t need too much detail faraway the coast line. But the feeling to be in a ship`s bridge very well equipped is almost unforgivable.

oceandream · « **Reply #9 on:** January 13, 2011, 20:38:13 »

GOOD AWNSER

And i agree with that, i dont want too use too much just have too have a real sim game

Kobus Post · « **Reply #10 on:** January 13, 2011, 20:51:55 »

Do you know the System Requirements of Nautis?

They are much higher than SSE

Nautis System Requirements
OS: Windows® Vista™ 64bit or Windows® 7 64bit (Professional or Ultimate version of Windows)
CPU: Intel® Core I5 (with at least 3.0 Ghz)
RAM: 4 GB RAM
Video: ATI Radeon HD 5870
Drive: 48x speed PC DVD-ROM
Hard Disk Space: 3 GB
Sound: DirectX® 9.0 compatible sound card
Power supply: 550 Watt output or more
Other: Keyboard, Speakers and Mouse with scroll wheel

Third Mate · « **Reply #11 on:** January 14, 2011, 03:17:19 »

Quote from: Kobus Post on January 13, 2011, 20:51:55

Do you know the System Requirements of Nautis?

They are much higher than SSE

Nautis System Requirements
OS: WindowsÂ® Vistaâ„¢ 64bit or WindowsÂ® 7 64bit (Professional or Ultimate version of Windows)
CPU: IntelÂ® Core I5 (with at least 3.0 Ghz)
RAM: 4 GB RAM
Video: ATI Radeon HD 5870
Drive: 48x speed PC DVD-ROM
Hard Disk Space: 3 GB
Sound: DirectXÂ® 9.0 compatible sound card
Power supply: 550 Watt output or more
Other: Keyboard, Speakers and Mouse with scroll wheel

I would qualify(sorta), for Ghz I have 2.9er, the Video is 5700 ATI Radeon HD series, the rest is fine.

Targ · « **Reply #12 on:** January 14, 2011, 04:23:14 »

I would kill those spec's

4.2 6 core cpu

8 gb ram Corsar dominator

2xGTX295 2g vids Zotac

2x26" w screens

1000W PSU

Water cooled

1.2 TB hdd of Raid 10 thats 4 x HDD's 600gb
600Gb SSd windows boot drive
300GB V.raptor HDD near as fast as the SSD windows install backup install disk hgh disk usage game like SSE and WOW. the rest of my game and programs are on teh raid.

Sound blaster Wiz bang Sound card
DVD rom iks atleast 48x if not more.. that system cost $3K 6 months ago.. at the time was the best I could get..

its not like the system we play with are feeble and unable to run massive apps/games...

Third Mate · « **Reply #13 on:** January 14, 2011, 04:44:19 »

Quote from: Targ on January 14, 2011, 04:23:14

I would kill those spec's

4.2 6 core cpu

8 gb ram Corsar dominator

2xGTX295 2g vids Zotac

2x26" w screens

1000W PSU

Water cooled

1.2 TB hdd of Raid 10 thats 4 x HDD's 600gb
600Gb SSd windows boot drive
300GB V.raptor HDD near as fast as the SSD windows install backup install disk hgh disk usage game like SSE and WOW. the rest of my game and programs are on teh raid.

Sound blaster Wiz bang Sound card
DVD rom iks atleast 48x if not more.. that system cost $3K 6 months ago.. at the time was the best I could get..

its not like the system we play with are feeble and unable to run massive apps/games...

Thinking of getting some alienware near future?

Kobus Post · « **Reply #14 on:** January 14, 2011, 09:32:04 »

Targ, thats a very nice pc!! But not every SSE player have a pc thats so fast.

nathan.rail · « **Reply #15 on:** January 15, 2011, 19:21:04 »

Quote from: Kobus Post on January 13, 2011, 20:51:55

Do you know the System Requirements of Nautis?

They are much higher than SSE

Nautis System Requirements
OS: WindowsÂ® Vistaâ„¢ 64bit or WindowsÂ® 7 64bit (Professional or Ultimate version of Windows)
CPU: IntelÂ® Core I5 (with at least 3.0 Ghz)
RAM: 4 GB RAM
Video: ATI Radeon HD 5870
Drive: 48x speed PC DVD-ROM
Hard Disk Space: 3 GB
Sound: DirectXÂ® 9.0 compatible sound card
Power supply: 550 Watt output or more
Other: Keyboard, Speakers and Mouse with scroll wheel

My god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This game have a GREAT graphics!

Semmy · « **Reply #16 on:** January 16, 2011, 04:00:57 »

Quote from: Kobus Post on January 14, 2011, 09:32:04

Targ, thats a very nice pc!! But not every SSE player have a pc thats so fast.

Very true, however some of us do, plus as technology moves on folk will upgrade. Rather than hard limiting graphics by stripping stuff out, why not leave the option to have the "good" graphics and let users with lower powered systems choose to reduce graphics levels.

MokMok · « **Reply #17 on:** January 16, 2011, 11:42:56 »

We should have in the next patch the option for choosing to reduce the graphics level of the game. Lower graphics level will improve the performance:

The option for the native graphics level of SSE2010, with very fine textures, etc. But ath the expense of the performance;
The other option for reducing the graphics level to the level of SS06/SS08 with smoother more uniform textures which take less system resources and improves the performance.

Mad_Fred · « **Reply #18 on:** January 16, 2011, 16:57:47 »

There are already built in graphics settings to lower or raise.

But some people say that does little to the actual performance or graphics.

I wonder if these people perhaps let their Nview or Nhancer of Catalyst Control Center override these settings. Maybe wise to check that out.

Rolling back to SS06/SS08, that's just not really how it works. That's a different game, with a different way of doing things, you can't just switch to those anymore.

Fred

mvsmith · « **Reply #19 on:** January 16, 2011, 17:38:57 »

MokMok:
If you are talking about reducing the quality of textures, etc., that canâ€™t be done with a simple option.
That requires an alternative version of the game with reduced qualityâ€”also with certain performance impacting features missing such as AI characters, AI ships in free roam and in basic environments etc.
It would probably also mean reverting to the simpler track-following AI of 2008.
It is those features that affect performance more than the quality of the graphics.

Semmy · « **Reply #20 on:** January 16, 2011, 17:53:43 »

Quote from: Mad_Fred on January 16, 2011, 16:57:47

Rolling back to SS06/SS08, that's just not really how it works. That's a different game, with a different way of doing things, you can't just switch to those anymore.

Great misquote there Fred, what he said was a reduction of quality of graphics to the SS06/08 graphical standard, NOT as you imply a roll back to the game engine.

Just out of interest I have just been through my catalogue of sims/games installed and every single one has a multitude of options for reducing the workload on the GPU side of things.

Here is a quick question for the intelligentsia of the forum, if the GPU is not the limiting factor to the performance why was the graphics quality reduced from the "beta"? (re. previous posts concerning reduction in quality vs. pre release screenshots)

mvsmith · « **Reply #21 on:** January 16, 2011, 20:10:05 »

Quote from: Semmy on January 16, 2011, 17:53:43

Here is a quick question for the intelligentsia of the forum, if the GPU is not the limiting factor to the performance why was the graphics quality reduced from the "beta"? (re. previous posts concerning reduction in quality vs. pre release screenshots)

This has been answered many times:
The time from the rendering of one frame to the rendering of the next frameâ€”the reciprocal of the frame rateâ€”has two parts: The time spent in rendering the frame and the time spent calculating the new position and attitude of every moveable object so that the rendering of the next frame can begin.

The first is done mainly in the GPU, with some necessary work by the CPU. The less capable graphics cards require more work by the CPU. The time required for rendering can be reduced by reducing the quality via the graphics options, or by reducing the quality of the textures and effects. The less capable the card, the greater the gain in performance.

The length of the second period is determined entirely by the speed of the CPU, memory, and disk.

Because of the computational demands of the sea model, the dynamics of all the ships, and the AI shipsâ€”which are all on autopilot instead of following a pre-defined path (as in â€™08)â€”the second period has the greater influence on frame rate.

Also, when the earlier graphics quality was reduced â€œfor performance reasonsâ€, that does not necessarily mean it was done to improve the frame rate. Rather, it was done to reduce the memory burden.

MokMok · « **Reply #22 on:** January 16, 2011, 20:19:19 »

@Mvsmith:

Quote

The first is done mainly in the GPU, with some necessary work by the CPU. The less capable graphics cards require more work by the CPU. The time required for rendering can be reduced by reducing the quality via the graphics options, or by reducing the quality of the textures and effects. The less capable the card, the greater the gain in performance.

Why doesn't SSE2010 have the same quality of textures and effects of SS08 and why must SSE2010 have so much eyecandy? The more equal quality of the texturesand effects of SS08 are good enough, aren't they? Eyecandy only takes much more CPU and GPU resources.

mvsmith · « **Reply #23 on:** January 16, 2011, 20:27:04 »

You must ask VSTEP about that, but I suspect itâ€™s because they felt that users demanded it, as they demanded lots of people wandering aimlessly about on the ships.

Semmy · « **Reply #24 on:** January 16, 2011, 23:17:15 »

Quote from: mvsmith on January 16, 2011, 20:10:05

This has been answered many times:
The time from the rendering of one frame >SNIP< done to reduce the memory burden.

Thanks for the reply MVSmith, however maybe you would like to try and answer the question I actually asked?

I do understand the CPU is a major factor in terms of performance HOWEVER why should owners of higher spec GPUs be forced to use lower quality graphics? To whit, better graphics were available but Vstep toned them down.

To be fair the minimum specs on this game are pretty low:-
3.0GHz processor - Available since Nov 2002
Nvidia 8800 - Available since May 2007
So effectively Vstep pegged the lower limit at a nine year old CPU and a four year old GPU?

IF as you say better graphics can be turned down to reduce the performance hit, why were we not given the opportunity to do so? Unless of course the better graphics only ever existed as rendered images rather than in game screen shots?

Author Topic: Future possiblities for Ship Simulator Extremes? (Read 18267 times)

mvsmith

mvsmith

mvsmith

mvsmith