Do we really need a Silent Hunter 6?

TDK1044 · 03-26-10, 01:39 PM

You know, we have Silent Hunter III with the truly excellent Grey Wolves Expansion mod. We have Silent Hunter IV and the excellent mods to both the fleet boat game and the U Boat game. Now we have Silent Hunter 5, which by the end of the year will be a heavily modded and very playable game.

I personally wouldn't mind at all if we didn't see another WWII sub sim for 3 or 4 years. At that point, either Ubisoft could release another one, hopefully having learned something from the SH5 fiasco, or there may even be a new interested Publisher by then.

I think the last thing we need is 'Silent Hunter 6 Fiasco in the Pacific' about 12 months down the line.

IanC · 03-26-10, 01:44 PM

If they push out a defective SH6, the same as SH4 and 5, then forget it! Either Ubi takes the time and delivers a quality product, or give me no product at all.
I've pretty much dismissed Ubisoft as competent in the simulator dept anyways.

thyro · 03-29-10, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanC

I've pretty much dismissed Ubisoft as competent in the simulator dept anyways.

I fully agree with above sentence!

SS bought
SH2 bought
SH3 bought
SH4 bought
SH5 not bought and never will unless DRM gets dropped.

SH3+SH4 full fill the requirements.

I just live in hope that one of these days a software house developes modern era of Sub Sims and leave the old WWII veteran subs rest in peace for good.

mcarlsonus · 03-29-10, 08:55 AM

I dunno about, "modern day." I've played 'em all: "688," "Red Storm Rising," even "Seawolf." They were all fine in their day and for the more advanced equipment they represented. However, in a sim like, "Seawolf," one spent much of ones time staring at a, "waterfall" display screen representing passive sonar. After listening to whales for awhile, etc., one LONGS for the opportunity to just look out the window (periscope) or surface for a gun drill...

Morpheus · 03-29-10, 09:08 AM

SH5 is a Epic failure

I got a try on it from a friend, since i would never buy a game with something like a DRM requirement. After my first few hours of play i can only say: MEGA ROFL - pull the plug and sink the game.

The only attraction is the good graphic!

Gameplay is rubbish and tends to give you arcade feeling which i dont like.

I dont need SH5, and i certainly don't need another SH Verison published by UBI ... byebye UBI

Kepler · 03-29-10, 10:03 AM

I need UBI to fix (no, completely REDO!) just about every aspect of the SH5-game I've actually BOUGHT, apart from the visuals. But I somehow doubt they'll manage to convert a poorly coded, extremely simplistic roleplaying game into something one could call a "sim".

I was hopeful when I heard that the SH5 devs were paying attention to what the GWX guys had done to SH3. Thus, it completely baffles me that they thought SH5 would cater to the same crowd that enjoyed GWX!

And this is just me complaining about the design decisions (I really hate the way they've went with SH5 in most ways) - I haven't even started on the whole "alpha state release" rant.

Solidsnake2234 · 09-15-11, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanC

If they push out a defective SH6, the same as SH4 and 5, then forget it! Either Ubi takes the time and delivers a quality product, or give me no product at all.
I've pretty much dismissed Ubisoft as competent in the simulator dept anyways.

What about IL-2? They did pretty good with that simulator series (besides IL-2 Wings of Prey)

CCIP · 09-15-11, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solidsnake2234

What about IL-2? They did pretty good with that simulator series (besides IL-2 Wings of Prey)

That was over 8 years ago. Look at their new title (Cliffs of Dover) and despair.

It is also worth noting that Ubi had nothing to do with the development of IL-2 games. Those are developed and published in Russia by 1C, and licensed for distribution in the West by Ubisoft.

0rpheus · 09-16-11, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP

That was over 8 years ago. Look at their new title (Cliffs of Dover) and despair.

It is also worth noting that Ubi had nothing to do with the development of IL-2 games. Those are developed and published in Russia by 1C, and licensed for distribution in the West by Ubisoft.

I share your despair on that one! Still, the latest Beta is a big improvement (especially in sound) and gives me hope, there's talk of an entire gfx engine overhaul in the works... fingers crossed!

JU_88 · 09-16-11, 12:48 PM

I wish the last three installments of Silent Hunter had been done differently.
Three seperate silent hunter titles in 5 years was a mistake, each one realeased with its flaws, then ditched in favour of a sequel with improved visuals and a game engine overhaul.
Thats what you do with Action games, but not simulators.

They should have held out on SH3 and and just gone for ONE 'open ended' Silent hunter title - then contiue to develop the hell out it by taking it down the 'expansive sim' route (like IL2 or Railworks)
Its the obvious choice for Simulators since they sell well over a long time period, offer huge replay value, and the players are more concerned about of content than they are about aging graphics engines.

We could have had new Theratres of operation, ship packs, playable destroyers and god know what else. Plus they could spent more time on fixes also.
I know modders did great stuff for all three titles, but even their work would have benefited from not being scattered over three games.
Ubi could have cut alot of uncessary work out for the modders, especially for things like fixes.

Look at SHV, just getting a drivable Type 9 (to a similar standard to the ingame type 7 is monsterous task for any modder, not to mention the hours and hours of time needed from 3d artists.

GT182 · 09-18-11, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP

That was over 8 years ago. Look at their new title (Cliffs of Dover) and despair.

It is also worth noting that Ubi had nothing to do with the development of IL-2 games. Those are developed and published in Russia by 1C, and licensed for distribution in the West by Ubisoft.

And that is the big problem..... " licensed for distribution in the West by Ubisoft."

UBI does nothing but srrew up anything they get their hands on these days because of their paranoia it will be pirated. They still haven't learnt it's been pirated before it hits the market, and even with their DRMs it will still be pirated.... even with keycodes. So they make it miserable for the rest of us that pay for a simulation we really look forward to but can't play they way it's intended to be played. IL-2 1946 was the last sim we can play without having to use Steam..... which I don't like one bit, but is forced on me.

It would be nice if Oleg and 1C would get away from UBI, and get someone else to publish their simulations when their contract is up with them. Then you see all the bitching stop..... hopefully.

Solidsnake2234 · 09-20-11, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP

That was over 8 years ago. Look at their new title (Cliffs of Dover) and despair.

It is also worth noting that Ubi had nothing to do with the development of IL-2 games. Those are developed and published in Russia by 1C, and licensed for distribution in the West by Ubisoft.

Hmm...good point. Its still an awesome game. And when I say IL-2, I meant IL-2 1946.

wingtip · 03-16-12, 06:44 PM

I am fine with sticking with ww2 era but i want more mp fun like being able to have human player at the various stations, and human players being able to play as the surface ships ... talk about teamwork... big fun..

Schütze · 04-09-13, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanC

If they push out a defective SH6, the same as SH4 and 5, then forget it! Either Ubi takes the time and delivers a quality product, or give me no product at all.
I've pretty much dismissed Ubisoft as competent in the simulator dept anyways.

Spot on. Time for they to step up to the plate and finally give a quality product and not some half-hearted, historically inaccurate, junk that the modding community will try to save.

I have grown impatient with them. Time to learn from your mistakes.

JagdPanzer44 · 04-09-13, 11:51 AM

Only if:

1) Ubisoft is not involved.

2.) The emphasis is squarely on gameplay; not mindless fluff, i.e., useless crew dialogue, rpg elements, super-special abilities.

"Skyrim" in a submarine is not a simulation.

3.) The game needs to be finished and working.

Not a rough beta dumped into the hands of "those modders at Subsim". I think we've all paid Ubisoft more than enough money to test and then fix their broken products over all these years.

We also need to stop listening to those people who will invariably begin crowing "we need to support $$$ Ubisoft because they're the only game in town...". Been there done that, you can keep the T-shirt.

03-26-10, 01:39 PM	#1
TDK1044 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 2,674 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	Do we really need a Silent Hunter 6? You know, we have Silent Hunter III with the truly excellent Grey Wolves Expansion mod. We have Silent Hunter IV and the excellent mods to both the fleet boat game and the U Boat game. Now we have Silent Hunter 5, which by the end of the year will be a heavily modded and very playable game. I personally wouldn't mind at all if we didn't see another WWII sub sim for 3 or 4 years. At that point, either Ubisoft could release another one, hopefully having learned something from the SH5 fiasco, or there may even be a new interested Publisher by then. I think the last thing we need is 'Silent Hunter 6 Fiasco in the Pacific' about 12 months down the line.

04-09-13, 11:51 AM	#15
JagdPanzer44 Swabbie Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 13 Downloads: 42 Uploads: 0	Only if: 1) Ubisoft is not involved. 2.) The emphasis is squarely on gameplay; not mindless fluff, i.e., useless crew dialogue, rpg elements, super-special abilities. "Skyrim" in a submarine is not a simulation. 3.) The game needs to be finished and working. Not a rough beta dumped into the hands of "those modders at Subsim". I think we've all paid Ubisoft more than enough money to test and then fix their broken products over all these years. We also need to stop listening to those people who will invariably begin crowing "we need to support $$$ Ubisoft because they're the only game in town...". Been there done that, you can keep the T-shirt. Last edited by JagdPanzer44; 04-09-13 at 12:01 PM.

03-26-10, 01:44 PM	#2
IanC Grey Wolf Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Running silent and deep Posts: 902 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	If they push out a defective SH6, the same as SH4 and 5, then forget it! Either Ubi takes the time and delivers a quality product, or give me no product at all. I've pretty much dismissed Ubisoft as competent in the simulator dept anyways.

03-29-10, 08:55 AM	#4
mcarlsonus Weps Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 362 Downloads: 13 Uploads: 0	I dunno about, "modern day." I've played 'em all: "688," "Red Storm Rising," even "Seawolf." They were all fine in their day and for the more advanced equipment they represented. However, in a sim like, "Seawolf," one spent much of ones time staring at a, "waterfall" display screen representing passive sonar. After listening to whales for awhile, etc., one LONGS for the opportunity to just look out the window (periscope) or surface for a gun drill...

03-29-10, 09:08 AM	#5
Morpheus Ensign Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 234 Downloads: 17 Uploads: 0	SH5 is a Epic failure I got a try on it from a friend, since i would never buy a game with something like a DRM requirement. After my first few hours of play i can only say: MEGA ROFL - pull the plug and sink the game. The only attraction is the good graphic! Gameplay is rubbish and tends to give you arcade feeling which i dont like. I dont need SH5, and i certainly don't need another SH Verison published by UBI ... byebye UBI

03-29-10, 10:03 AM	#6
Kepler Swabbie Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 13 Downloads: 31 Uploads: 0	I need UBI to fix (no, completely REDO!) just about every aspect of the SH5-game I've actually BOUGHT, apart from the visuals. But I somehow doubt they'll manage to convert a poorly coded, extremely simplistic roleplaying game into something one could call a "sim". I was hopeful when I heard that the SH5 devs were paying attention to what the GWX guys had done to SH3. Thus, it completely baffles me that they thought SH5 would cater to the same crowd that enjoyed GWX! And this is just me complaining about the design decisions (I really hate the way they've went with SH5 in most ways) - I haven't even started on the whole "alpha state release" rant.

09-16-11, 12:48 PM	#10
JU_88 Silent Hunter Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: UK Posts: 3,727 Downloads: 11 Uploads: 0	I wish the last three installments of Silent Hunter had been done differently. Three seperate silent hunter titles in 5 years was a mistake, each one realeased with its flaws, then ditched in favour of a sequel with improved visuals and a game engine overhaul. Thats what you do with Action games, but not simulators. They should have held out on SH3 and and just gone for ONE 'open ended' Silent hunter title - then contiue to develop the hell out it by taking it down the 'expansive sim' route (like IL2 or Railworks) Its the obvious choice for Simulators since they sell well over a long time period, offer huge replay value, and the players are more concerned about of content than they are about aging graphics engines. We could have had new Theratres of operation, ship packs, playable destroyers and god know what else. Plus they could spent more time on fixes also. I know modders did great stuff for all three titles, but even their work would have benefited from not being scattered over three games. Ubi could have cut alot of uncessary work out for the modders, especially for things like fixes. Look at SHV, just getting a drivable Type 9 (to a similar standard to the ingame type 7 is monsterous task for any modder, not to mention the hours and hours of time needed from 3d artists.

03-16-12, 06:44 PM	#13
wingtip A-ganger Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 71 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	I am fine with sticking with ww2 era but i want more mp fun like being able to have human player at the various stations, and human players being able to play as the surface ships ... talk about teamwork... big fun..