An Open Letter to Neal and the SH5 Developer team

[urfisch]

interesting, if the UBI guys are not only reading this, but also think about this. and maybe answer to this...

there are many things written down, which i agree and i think, which most of the people here agree.

a guy in the german ubi forum stated, he thinks, now as the sheep is out the shed with only one type sim..., the game might be more finished and set up with better gameplay - as there was more time to concentrate on these things. he got many complaints about his statement, and i complain about this too. i really wonder, if they where able to raise sh5 onto a higher (better!) level of gameplay, or just to another level.

no one knows. but the misgiving hasnt been really fixed. although i was nicely surprised to read about ai wolfpacks, who attack in your area.

[Adriatico]

Don't understand all that noise about buying possible Type IX... if initial sim is fine.

You would spend 10$-15$ in a one evening in pub, and forget it two days later...

Do you simmers understand huw much work and passion (let alone time) it takes to fully model and polish 3D interactive interior of Type IX ?
Have you ever tried to model something in 3D ?

Have you really expected that it could be done - as paralel project with VIIc ?

Flight Simulator community is downloading all sorts of stuff, for a years, for a 10-20$ and consider it normal...

I do understand that many people do not want to pay that... but please don't call yourself IX type passionate simulation fans...

[Mikhayl]

For the folks bitching about the hypothetical price of hypothetical DLC of a full Type IX with full interior and all the fittings: http://www.turbosquid.com/Search/Ind...marine&x=0&y=0

Makes one think twice eh.

Regarding quality and time needed, on the Ubi forum GKane said that the exterior player sub models have 2 million triangles, and I guess the interior is anywhere between 2 and 5 millions.

[Shakermaker]

Quoted for relevance:

Originally Posted by elanaiba

Let's stop that right there.

The campaign will be much more dynamic (not to mention moddable in a very powerful way) than SH3/4. (BTW those were not dynamic, but random)

People keep turning words around trying to find proof that their greatest fears come true: Scripted Campaign.

Yes, you have a crew. Yes, there's a storyline to it.

But the campaign is dynamic and that's the end of it I wouldn't have it any other way.

[AVGWarhawk]

I'm going to Disney World. Upon my return I shall purchase the game.

[rascal101]

Hi to you Neal,

Many thanks for your response to mine - I did put a lot of thought into what I wrote as I did not want to be seen as one more who's moaning because the last rivet on the port side section of the rear torpedo tube is in the wrong place, the wrong shade of red and has a slight egg shape instead of perfectly spherical.

Nor did I want to be negative about the shortened campaign or the possibility of having to purchase additional items as yet to be developed as add-ons to the game - Like you I actually think this is a sure sign of healthy and continuing developer interest in a published game, rather than a cunning plot to fleece the poor and down-trodden gamer.

Since news of the imminent release of SH5, like you I've watched in horror as people took the trouble to accuse Ubisoft, the developer team or each other of all sorts of heinous crimes ranging from a plot to take over the world, destroy civilization as we know it, right through to they guy who wont buy SH5 because there are bow waves on some stationary ships in one of the videos.

I've refrained from making any comment on these issues as for the most part I felt they are small beer, likely to be sorted out by the developers before release - or the modders afterwards.

Last night having re-read your original interview and watched the latest video yet again I believe I hit on the answer and would like to pose the following question which goes to the heart of my concern.

It seems to me that the developers have created a historically, or at least chronologically plausible story line using the period 1939-43 as the base - within which you get to set out on a series of Dynamic Missions. There would be some acknowledgement of your achievements in a given mission, a letter from Donitz, a promotion which will give you a warm inner glow.

To some one with even a small understanding of WW2 history, YOU DONT CHANGE HISTORY ON THE STRENGTH OF A SINGLE SOLDIER, PLANE OR SHIP - unless you happen to sink the battleship with Winston Churchill on board or take out an aircraft carrier.

A single submarine does not change the outcome of the war, the actions of a number of subs in a given theatre might - but a single sub does not

As you say the concept might work, but to my mind it hasn’t where it’s been tried before! Witness Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising, stunning graphics, believable story line, the original STALKER, stunning graphics, believable story - right through to PT Boats, reasonable graphics - banal story - There are others where this has been done with varying style and quality.

The one thing that all of the above have in common, despite their great graphics and varying story is that having played them once, THEY ARE OF NO FURTHER INTEREST AND HAPPILY SHELVED - THIS WAS NEVER THE CASE WITH SH3 - which some folks are still playing 5 years after the original release.

This is the unique aspect of SH3 which every one loves, even though graphically it’s looking a bit tired, but the game delivers a random and surprising experience every time which all of the games outlined above simply do not do, they are static and unchanging.

I bought Flashpoint Dragon Rising, enjoyed it the first time, but never since. PT Boats, played a couple of missions - uninstalled the game. Band of Brothers the first in the series was great, the last was graphically superior to the first, but the story was tedious and banal and not worth a second go - you just know what’s going to happen next.

At the end of the day I’d like some clarification re the above - even if I'm right I'll probably still buy the game as I love the new graphics and, well it’s a U-Boat sim and I’d love it for that if nothing else.

But, having played through the first time, I doubt if it will have the same replay value as SH3, and I doubt any one will be playing it with passion and enthusiasm five years after release.

I hope you can get some comment from the developers - just a simple yes or no would do – if its as I suspect then I don’t have to keep logging onto SubSim to read all the crap as its going to be just another game anyway.

If I’m wrong and SH5 really does offer something unique as did SH3, or any of the Total War Series then I will happily and enthusiastically log on here until the cows come home to find out the latest

Best Regards to you, the SubSim Community and the Silent Hunter Developer team

Rascal

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

Thanks for the thoughtful message. If Dan says it has a dynamic campaign, who are we to doubt him. He knows this better than any of us and he is a very straightforward guy. This is not Ubi marketing talking, this is the lead designer. I see no reason to worry, Dan likes realistic and dynamic subsim gameplay AT LEAST as much as 99% of us.

I cannot speak for the developers, but I can say that since the first computer game was about to be released, the first players who posted in the first forum set an annoying trend/mindset that persists to this day: mild mass hysteria

Seriously, as far back as Aces of the Deep and Jane's 688(I), people get really worked up and passionate over imagined and real objections to these games, so much so it's silly. Sure, people should express their thoughts, whether they approve or disapprove of a game and it's features. But it's like there's an unwritten rule that people have to one-up each other with negativity. That is one of the main things that led me to start a Subsim forum back in 1998. I was really tired of reading unrestrained idiocy in other forums, I wanted a place where people could discuss games without degrading the theme into "This game SUXX!!" and similar rants. Who needs that?

As for SH5, I have not had a first hand test drive, so I am waiting like everyone else to see if it will pass muster, if the amplified RPG elements will make the game fun and if they will make the narrorer scope worth it. I do not know what market research Ubisoft did to lead them to try this different variant, but, I try to keep an open mind. Hey, it may turn out to be frigging great, who knows. I was really happy with SH3 and pretty happy with SH4 (patched). If SH5 does not live up to my expectations, well, I hope that will factor into the concepts behind SH6 (if there will be one, again, who knows ).

As for DLC, and adding a Type IX: if the SH5 with the Type VII gameplay and realism are terrific, and the interactive crew raises the genre to a new level like SH3 did, then hell yes, I would be happy to buy a Type IX DLC or add-on. I don't see this as a way for Ubi to squeeze $$ out of us, they are a business and I want the most subsim content I can get. Some people who do not know what they are talking about, do not know what the dev costs and resources are into making this game, may argue they are being ripped off, so let them skip it. But if the game turns out to be good, they will silently join us. Even if they admit they were mistaken (very rare), they sure did not do the sub game business any favors with their bad and uninformed word of mouth.

Of course, if the game is broken and released unfinished and does not get patched, then that's a different story.

[cappy70]

Well,,I've been here long enough in SUB SIM(10 years next year) and a Sim freak for a looooong time,,( I've not posted much, but read;YES) to see these tendencies from many that they want, not a Sim, but the real world really squeezed into the gameplay,that is just ok, but with one slight complication and that is also when the game turn into a: "Not-game", but an idea that one want it to become really real, real like the real world we live in with all that comes with that,that is also ok from the perspective of a Sim fan,,but.....................................
Here's the basic problem: It is a G A M E.

In a game (sim) concept you have the idea to mimic the real world and try to follow the real world as much as you can and for example in SH3 they did a fantastic job, BUT SH3 was not still the real world and after SH3 these tendencies with SH3 as a "measure-bar" has become worse ( 'worse' is the only word I can find for now to use). I want , yes, a Dynamic campaign too, but I don't want a n o t h e r SH3 , I have that game already.

SH5 comes with a new concept, 3D interior (FPS style), RPG, dynamic campaign and so on and also with some daring things like ending at 1943 with 1 Sub.
("All movies cannot be made the same way").
If all this holds together , just fine and I don't give a .

Well, let this game be released first, give it a chance and t h e n we'll see if any fears were well founded or not ( "mass hysteria" as Neal called it and I agree 100%) .
I'm so tired of seeing this "pre-making-the-game-already-being-ready-painting-the-devil-on-the-wall" things coming out.
Wishes and ideas to a concept is one thing, but this pre-making the game even before it is ready/shown as ready is just

Why just not make SH3 ver.1.02.03.04.05.06.......................

( I still play GWX SH3 all the time, but I want a new subsim as well now and then).
...just my 2 cents.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by rascal101

I did put a lot of thought into what I wrote as I did not want to be seen as one more who's moaning because the last rivet on the port side section of the rear torpedo tube is in the wrong place, the wrong shade of red and has a slight egg shape instead of perfectly spherical.

I know this is your response to Neal and not to me, but it ties in with what I wanted to say before. I was in the middle of typing up a detailed reply to your reply to me, but got called away from my computer, and just now got back.

What it all boiled down to was that I'm glad to see at least one person who voices his misgivings in a real conversation, not just a quick and uninformed dismissal of something said by this or that developer or seen in a three-minute video.

I enjoyed reading your thoughts in detail, and appreciate your respect for those who disagree. I hope I'm giving you the same.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I know this is your response to Neal and not to me, but it ties in with what I wanted to say before. I was in the middle of typing up a detailed reply to your reply to me, but got called away from my computer, and just now got back.

What it all boiled down to was that I'm glad to see at least one person who voices his misgivings in a real conversation, not just a quick and uninformed dismissal of something said by this or that developer or seen in a three-minute video.

I enjoyed reading your thoughts in detail, and appreciate your respect for those who disagree. I hope I'm giving you the same.

Agreed. I feel discussing the strengths and weakness of a game with calm intelligence is what separates this forum from many other game forums. Of course, we have our share of one-line ranters, but nobody's perfect.

Originally Posted by cappy70

Well,,I've been here long enough in SUB SIM(10 years next year) and a Sim freak for a looooong time,,( I've not posted much, but read;YES) to see these tendencies from many that they want, not a Sim....

Wow, Cappy, good to see you!! One of the real veterans of the SH2 hoopla!

[Steeltrap]

I posted a similar comment elsewhere, but I've got some time to kill, so....

The 'storyline' bit bothers me, too. If that is linear in that it forces you to change bases/theatres/type VII model at the same time each time you play, then

But time will tell.

p.s. Neal, is there a 'longevity' award? Cappy is one of the few who seems to be of a similar vintage to me (and I've even got 9 months on him).

[rascal101]

I've learnt much from you - here's hoping Neil is able to get something useful, or reassuring from the developers - it does seem rather like the lead up to SH 3 all over again


Rascal

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I know this is your response to Neal and not to me, but it ties in with what I wanted to say before. I was in the middle of typing up a detailed reply to your reply to me, but got called away from my computer, and just now got back.

What it all boiled down to was that I'm glad to see at least one person who voices his misgivings in a real conversation, not just a quick and uninformed dismissal of something said by this or that developer or seen in a three-minute video.

I enjoyed reading your thoughts in detail, and appreciate your respect for those who disagree. I hope I'm giving you the same.

[Bosje]

so then, it's not scripted like SH2 was

it's dynamic rather than random (like SH3)

BUT the problem is, then:
-you start as 1WO and become kaleun, you get sent here and there
-how you perform will, to a degree, influence the rest of the campaign
-you're stuck in a VII and it ends in 1943

this is what i gathered so far and i like or at least don't mind all those things. (VII is my fav and i the early war is more fun anyway)

my worry is this:
do you get sent to the med at some point (probably a mission to slip through gibraltar etc)?
if you succeed, you are then in the med for a while, if you fail you are still in the atlantic?
does this happen every career?
or would you have needed to apply for transfer?

historically, the commanders did not have the choice, but we as gamers would very much INSIST we have that choice, i should think

so every single career you start, the same broad strokes are there: even though every single time you play things unfold dynamically

i think that's the major worry here

if it means i have to 'accidentally' fail a gibraltar mission if i want to stay in the atlantic all the time, then i'm out

my two cents
Bosje