I've owned this game since the day it was released physically in the states. I was somewhat disappointed that my machine has some difficulty playing the game with everything maxxed out, as I love the visuals of SH3 and SH4. Once I got my game tweaked the way I wanted it to blend performance and quality I realized that my enthusiasm to continue on playing SH4 was seriously lacking with all the bugs that were present.
I agree that patches 1.1 and 1.2 fixed a lot of what kept me from even double-clicking the desktop shortcut at first. Even after that, however, I'm angry that as customers we essentially need to plead our cases to Ubisoft to fix the obviously apparent problems that remain. What's worse is that we post here in chorus with a number of review sites, many of them very prominent, that gave the game a lower score and even, themselves, pointed out the still remaining flaws!
You can't tell me that the leadership within Ubisoft doesn't troll through the net to see what people are saying about their games! I'm not just talking an owner or whatever; I'm talking about leadership at any level from programming leads to documentation/research leads or whoever. The fact that consumers are still talking about issues with a product and no apparent indication from Ubisoft to correct those issues isn't a more obvious example of execution and follow-through.
I don't want to say that I won't play the game until the bugs are fixed because that just gives them the ammo to say "Well we got his money anyway. Why make a patch if he's not playing the game?" I am still playing the game! And like everyone else I do want play a game that feels complete. The only way to do that is to make at least a third patch.
-Travis
|