Did Gamealmighty.com review a cracked SHIV?

[Immacolata]

Check this out:

"Speaking of graphics, there are some unusual bugs that even the latest patch hasn't addressed, and my testing of the game on three different computers has revealed consistency. For one, don't be surprised to see the 3D models of your crew members suddenly morph into paper-thin 2D cardboard-cutouts. On one machine, the crew members not only went two-dimensional but suddenly had eyes the size of grapefruits, which added a massive degree of comedy to such a serious game, even if it was unintentional."

Overall they rate it 65% and are not happy. I can understand their annoyance at the bugs... but did they review a cracked version?

http://www.gamealmighty.com/game-review/review/Silent_Hunter_Wolves_of_the_Pacific/

[kiwi_2005]

They usually review latest beta's. Dont know, but game reviewers get the games sent to them for reviews so no need for them to DL a cracked version? Besides they would be silly buggars if they did.

[OneTinSoldier]

I would have to say that it at least casts a shadow of doubt. Since the game has been out and this behavior was stated to be due to pirated copies of the game, I haven't seen hardly anyone in here anyone at all(!), claiming to have this problem with their legit version.

So it doesn't seem to be a widespread problem with legit versions, but as you probably know, the Dev Team Message did state that there was one person with a legit copy that did encounter this problem. That means that we can't quite take a 'get a rope' mentality towards them since we can't be 100 percent certain. Naturally, it would be interesting to know for a fact if thier copy was legit or not.

Short answer... err question is, who knows 100 percent for certain?

[Immacolata]

Didnt say the copy wasn't legit but the reviewer could have used one of those infernal no-cd thingies. And thus getting this experience, to the detraction of the overall review score.

[akdavis]

Didnt say the copy wasn't legit but the reviewer could have used one of those infernal no-cd thingies. And thus getting this experience, to the detraction of the overall review score.
Regardless, you should not modify a product and then base the score on your modifications.

[wetwarev7]

Didnt say the copy wasn't legit but the reviewer could have used one of those infernal no-cd thingies. And thus getting this experience, to the detraction of the overall review score. Regardless, you should not modify a product and then base the score on your modifications.

I agree! If this is the case, then I would think it would be very poor judgement to review an altered .exe. I wonder just how many reviewers have actually done this, or tried to review a game on a computer with a hundred apps in the background, then give a low score because of undesireable results? :hmm:

[Takao]

They did say it only happened on one machine, and they tested it on three. So, its probably a bug/glitch. Still, I doubt it helped the overall score.

[Tigrone]

I've never seen any of the bug eyes or wafer people, but I did zoom in on my diving officer once till his eye filled my entire screen. Everytime I left-clicked to backout, it just zoomed in closer. I couldn't get out of the zoom-in.

But he did speak truely about the bad effects of releasing a game, so incomplete: "It's a betrayal to a loyal fanbase and a detriment to gaining new fans."

I'm worried about the word of mouth taking away sales before it can be fully patched up.

[Hartmann]

There is always the possibility of a error in the protection system in a purchased dvd, dev team recognised it and problably there are more issues.

i hope this not damage the game reputation as a buggy and unreliable and affect purchases

[Hans Schultz]

Ubisoft admited that the "2D" bug was affecting retail versions as well.

[Chuck B.]

Didnt say the copy wasn't legit but the reviewer could have used one of those infernal no-cd thingies. And thus getting this experience, to the detraction of the overall review score. Regardless, you should not modify a product and then base the score on your modifications.

I agree - but this example really shows what a bad idea this type of copy protection is. I'm totally at loss how you can intentionally dilute your own products with such a "protection scheme" that has a high chance of giving you a bad reputation of releasing a buggy product! Let's face it - most people who steal your game might not care enough to really find out what spoiled their enjoyment. For them, this will simply by a buggy game that will get the respective "recommendation" from them, damaging your further sales ... weird business strategy.

[gnirtS]

Ubi have admitted legitimate users are suffering from copy protection issues such as the above. Its quite possible thats why they had it.

Laughable situation at the moment, a game with lots of bugs but you cant tell if some are a real bug or an issue caused by non working copy protection.

In other words, the bugs are bugged!

[John Channing]

Ubi have admitted legitimate users are suffering from copy protection issues such as the above. Its quite possible thats why they had it.

Laughable situation at the moment, a game with lots of bugs but you cant tell if some are a real bug or an issue caused by non working copy protection.

In other words, the bugs are bugged!

Could someone point me to this admission. It's important.

JCC

[gnirtS]

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=108470

[Seatroit]

I have to wonder if there really has been an instance of a legit user having the 2D
problem. There may have been or there may yet be but if there wasn't, I think that the dev team would have to say that at least one legit copy has produced the undesired effect anyway in case one were to eventually appear and they wouldn't want to later be quoted calling a legit user a pirate in a public statement.

[Keelbuster]

I'm worried about the word of mouth taking away sales before it can be fully patched up.
It shouldn't have to be 'fully patched up', rather just fully produced up. Based on the things I've read about it, 65% seems about right. I'll have to see for myself though...

[mookiemookie]

Of course I have a legit copy of the game, and I don't have any no-cd patches either. I think the problem was a bit more widespread than they either realize or will admit.

That being said, before the 1.1 patch I did have a problem a couple times with the watch crew looking a bit funny when I rotated the anti aircraft guns around the conning tower and the camera moved to follow. Nothing as bad as the paper thin crew that people posted screenshots of. So if that means I had the "2D crew" bug, then so be it.

Post patch, I also noticed once that the command room officer had funny looking eyes at night when the red light was on in the command room, but that may have just been a byproduct of the fact they their eyes look funny to begin with. I didn't pay much attention to it at the time.

Another character problem I had once since patching was that my deck crew was standing around with their arms out at their sides like they were letting their armpits dry instead of looking through the binoculars:

http://home.houston.rr.com/mookiemookiemook/SH4Img24-3-2007.JPG

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think it was more than just pirate versions having these troubles with the game.

[Jonin]

Maybe he's pretending to be flying...:lol:

[Seatroit]

Another character problem I had once since patching was that my deck crew was standing around with their arms out at their sides like they were letting their armpits dry instead of looking through the binoculars:


yeah I remember reading back when SH3 was released that this effect was happening to some - some replied that they have seen it in other games too - apparently, characters are modeled this way before they are given "life" -

weird...I wonder what brings on this undesired effect

[GoldenEagle8]

Another character problem I had once since patching was that my deck crew was standing around with their arms out at their sides like they were letting their armpits dry instead of looking through the binoculars
Thats called the "T Pose" I think, thats how they model characters before they make them look like people, move, and do. They do it so when early in the making of the character (starts out all dots and lines), they can define what parts are what.

[Schlageter-JG26]

FYI - I did find a workaround for running the game without the dvd and it worked with no alterations whatsoever in gameplay and no weird security things.

However, with all the bugs in the game and BS problems I am still using the disc to play so I can be more sure that if something is wrong its because the devs screwed the pooch and not because I am playing the game in a manner the ruling regime at UBI does not approve of on my own pc. :stare:

[rls669]

Thats called the "T Pose" I think, thats how they model characters before they make them look like people, move, and do. Yes, that's a standard modelling pose, looks like the animations aren't being applied to the character mesh.

[beer_war]

I would have to say that it at least casts a shadow of doubt. Since the game has been out and this behavior was stated to be due to pirated copies of the game, I haven't seen hardly anyone in here anyone at all(!), claiming to have this problem with their legit version.


Gee, I wonder why! Maybe it has something to do with this:


A1) Crewmen appear flat, 2D; chanting numbers endlessly; you are using a No CD crack or illegal version of the game. Do not post.


http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=107766

[OneTinSoldier]

Ahhhh, I see. I hadn't read Page #1 of that thread in quite some time! Thanks for the heads up.

[NefariousKoel]

The big problem I have with copy protection software is that it's software.

There has rarely been a game released without software bugs on the PC. I think everyone here would agree with that.

And copy protection is software. Hence.. buggy.

Hell, I've had SecuRom on SH4 time out checking the disk numerous times telling me to p!ss off, retry, or check their site regarding DMA. Most instances it will start up like nobody's business.

My point... why are publishers paying money for more buggy software that only angers it's customers? In this specific case.. degrading the gameplay of paying customers.

Utterly detestable I say.

[Guido]

I actualy think they are entitled to the score they posted.
Its hardly what I would call "modifying the game" using a no dvd.exe!!

I am afraid If companies want to use these methods of protection, then expect these type of problems as a result...... cause and effect.

It's a subject thats been done to death, copy protection, I believe the reviewer was fully justified in using a NO DVD.exe, and as a result his gaming experience was tainted. Had the reviewer not been savvy, and always done as he was told, "YOU MUST COMPLY AND ENTER YOUR NAME RANK AND SERIAL NUMBER TO PLAY THE GAME" then the score might have been better, but as it stands, thats the result. I guess the guy just has an element of liberty about him, either that or hes a scoundrel by some peoples standards.......:arrgh!:

[P_Funk]

My point... why are publishers paying money for more buggy software that only angers it's customers? In this specific case.. degrading the gameplay of paying customers. Why do police insist that weed should be illegal? Why do politicians want 15 year olds tried as adults? Why did my parents not want me to go to that party when I could have told them there was no chance I was gonna have sex anyway (believe me I tried)?

Authority figures don't like giving up any control. Thats human nature. And corporations are insane about that. When their bottom line is about sales they obcess over "stolen" copies. Its obvious that they are rather crazy since they continue to try to protect it in ways that anger their customer base. But this also has to do with some weird inverted corporate culture where they feel they own the consumer and what not. Its like they're despots, entitled or sommat. Sales aren't a voluntary consumer choice, no its like collecting taxes. Their predicted sales are more concrete in their view than the actual outcome. Its like if I download a song then I probably don't think that its worth paying for and if I couldn't download it then I probably wouldn't bloody well pay for it anyway. Its imagined sales. Its assuming that every cracked version is a lost sale. But I can tell you in high school I knew crazy buggers that stole crap from 7-11 that they never would have paid for.

I think there's a point in there somewhere.:hmm:

[beer_war]

Great, people are already accussing Chris Jensen of having reviewed a pirated version (see the comment section under the review.), even though the copy protection is known to be unreliable. Guilty until proven innocent, I guess.

[Steeltrap]

i hope this not damage the game reputation as a buggy and unreliable and affect purchases


Well, gee, if this is a concern, maybe Ubi would actually allow the devs to finish the thing instead of unloading yet another piece of half-baked crap on us for premium $$. :damn: :damn:

[P_Funk]

i hope this not damage the game reputation as a buggy and unreliable and affect purchases

Well, gee, if this is a concern, maybe Ubi would actually allow the devs to finish the thing instead of unloading yet another piece of half-baked crap on us for premium $$. :damn: :damn:
Exactly. The consumer isn't on the hook for the quality of the product. Its the producer's job. We can't start being altruistic. To imply that we need to buy it before they'll put the time into it is just cohersive on their part.

[9th_cow]

if they did they used the wrong crack because the CP is long beaten.
but it does look that way.

remember tho, the devs saw it go mad on a legal copy, and the devs didnt get to see anywhere near as many copies in action as we all will.
CP sucks. only works to harm the ppl that pay for the games.

[John Channing]

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=108470

Thanks.

JCC

[John Channing]

My point... why are publishers paying money for more buggy software that only angers it's customers? In this specific case.. degrading the gameplay of paying customers. Why do police insist that weed should be illegal? Why do politicians want 15 year olds tried as adults? Why did my parents not want me to go to that party when I could have told them there was no chance I was gonna have sex anyway (believe me I tried)?

Authority figures don't like giving up any control. Thats human nature. And corporations are insane about that. When their bottom line is about sales they obcess over "stolen" copies. Its obvious that they are rather crazy since they continue to try to protect it in ways that anger their customer base. But this also has to do with some weird inverted corporate culture where they feel they own the consumer and what not. Its like they're despots, entitled or sommat. Sales aren't a voluntary consumer choice, no its like collecting taxes. Their predicted sales are more concrete in their view than the actual outcome. Its like if I download a song then I probably don't think that its worth paying for and if I couldn't download it then I probably wouldn't bloody well pay for it anyway. Its imagined sales. Its assuming that every cracked version is a lost sale. But I can tell you in high school I knew crazy buggers that stole crap from 7-11 that they never would have paid for.

I think there's a point in there somewhere.:hmm:

A couple of thoughts.

If I had a couple of million dollars invested in the development of a product I damn sure would do everything I could to prevent people from stealing it. You could log into an anonymous internet forum and call me obsessive if you like, but it comes down to the fact that they are protecting the investemnt of the shareholders of the company's money, which they are legally bound to do.

Your analogy about the music industry and downloading is spot on, but it makes the opposite arguement that you are trying to make with it. On eo f the largest music retailers in my country just closed shop in my city because he could no longer sell products due to downloading. Now a big part of that is that the industry, as a whole, missed the changes and were very late to come up with alternatives to illegal downloading, but the fact is that theft hurts sales.

It also hurts the hobby as a whole, and in this forum is ample evidence of that. Over the last week we have had an influx of people who were obviously playing warez versions of the game, but were still complaining very loudly about the quality of the their stolen version (personally, I balme the parents). So now we have the second wave of visitors coming in, skimming these posts, and coming to the conclusion that the game is unplayable.

Anyone who has spent some time with a legit version knows this is wrong at best, and bordering on the delusional. But the damage has been done.

Fortunately we are a rather small part of the overall market for the game so I still have some hope that this will not affect overall sales, but that hope is dimming with every "I have read the forums and decided not to buy SH4" post that shows up.

JCC

[Immacolata]

Sigh. Every thread turns into the same quagmire. I merely linked the review because that sentence made me worry if other reviewers use no-cd exes to review their games with. He might not have done that, but with all the bilge rats moaning about copy protection bugs on the boards, I figured he was suspect to the same problem.

SHIV is not unplayable. I've spent 15 hours with it at least, 4th patrol. Its glitchy yes, and for that does not deserve a top rating, but still playable enough that I bother with it for so many hours :)

[Front Runner]

It also hurts the hobby as a whole, and in this forum is ample evidence of that. Over the last week we have had an influx of people who were obviously playing warez versions of the game, but were still complaining very loudly about the quality of the their stolen version (personally, I balme the parents). So now we have the second wave of visitors coming in, skimming these posts, and coming to the conclusion that the game is unplayable.

Anyone who has spent some time with a legit version knows this is wrong at best, and bordering on the delusional. But the damage has been done.

Fortunately we are a rather small part of the overall market for the game so I still have some hope that this will not affect overall sales, but that hope is dimming with every "I have read the forums and decided not to buy SH4" post that shows up.

JCC

I have been playing with a LEGIT version of SH4 and I too have been complaining loudly. The fact is, this game is trashware in it's current release, even with the initial patch.
There are just too many bugs, too many! They can't all be attributed to faulty anti-piracy methods.
Every time I have tried to play a game, I get into it just so far, when one of the multiple bugs strikes and I feel like taking the disk and flinging it as far as I can.

This frustration stems from expecting a finished product and being hoodwinked into ordering pre-release with the expectation that I would receive a working product.
I've been playing computer games for almost 25 years and I know the difference between a playable but buggy release and an absolute dog, which is the case with SH4.

I am impressed with the level of detail that the DEV team has gone to lengths to present, however, it is unpresentable in it's present form.

This morning I went to check the progress of my transit from Midway to my patrol area, as I leave the program in 1X running while I sleep, I see that I've made some good overnight progress. I am checking my NAV map and all of a suddent the FROZEN HAND bug appears and I have to do a hard restart on my computer.

The bugs appear frequently and if you have played the game for any time whatsoever you will have to admit that you have encountered frequent and game busting bugs. I you disagree, then you have either not really played the game very much at all or you have the only version they released that is bug free.

It seems that everytime that I sit down to play, I discover another bug somewhere.

I bought a second copy to send to my brother, but now I am going to return it to Amazon and send my bro the money for beer instead.

[beer_war]

Anyone who has spent some time with a legit version knows this is wrong at best, and bordering on the delusional.


So you are saying that I, Front Runner and Chris Jensen (to name but a few) are bordering on the delusional then?

[Uber Gruber]

I'm definately bordering on the dillusional, and so is my wife....and our little dashhound called Colin!

[beer_war]

I'm definately bordering on the dillusional, and so is my wife....and our little dashhound called Colin!

But do you think SH IV is unplayable? Huh? DO YOU NOW? ;)

[Uber Gruber]

SH IV ?!!! What the devil is that ? I thought this was the "Greenland Writers Guild" forum....ooops :oops:

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Of course I have a legit copy of the game, and I don't have any no-cd patches either. I think the problem was a bit more widespread than they either realize or will admit.

That being said, before the 1.1 patch I did have a problem a couple times with the watch crew looking a bit funny when I rotated the anti aircraft guns around the conning tower and the camera moved to follow. Nothing as bad as the paper thin crew that people posted screenshots of. So if that means I had the "2D crew" bug, then so be it.

Post patch, I also noticed once that the command room officer had funny looking eyes at night when the red light was on in the command room, but that may have just been a byproduct of the fact they their eyes look funny to begin with. I didn't pay much attention to it at the time.

Another character problem I had once since patching was that my deck crew was standing around with their arms out at their sides like they were letting their armpits dry instead of looking through the binoculars:

http://home.houston.rr.com/mookiemookiemook/SH4Img24-3-2007.JPG

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think it was more than just pirate versions having these troubles with the game.


THIS GAME IS UTTER CRAP.

Looks nothing like Kate Winslet!




;););)

[John Channing]

Anyone who has spent some time with a legit version knows this is wrong at best, and bordering on the delusional.


So you are saying that I, Front Runner and Chris Jensen (to name but a few) are bordering on the delusional then?

If your point is that the game is unplayable (based, again onmy experience with a few different versions) then my answer would have to be yes.

Nowhere have I said that there are not problems, but unplayable is hyperbole, pure and simple.

JCC