Regarding Patch 1.3! (I hope...)

[hellas1]

Hello sub pimps and pimpettes, :|\\

Can ANYONE estimate if a 1.3 patch will be coming out at all?

I know this is a rather very sudden question as patch 1.2 is already out.

I must part now. Alas....... :|\\
hellas1

"What.....my torpedoes hit the Japanese battleship fore, port side AND aft?
:rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock:

[Cakewalk]

We sub community are indeed ravenous wolves... already has the 1.2 patch been released, and yet we have devoured it and hunger for more... or should I say... MOAR!:D

To answer your question, though, not a clue.:up: :rotfl:

[Uber Gruber]

Well, in fairness, we can hardly call 1.2 a "patch".....nope, I think "FUBAR" would be a nore appropiate word in all honesty.:know:

[flintlock]

Hopefully it'll be released soon™

1.2 improved on 1.1, though there are quiet a few things left to fix.

[SteamWake]

Hrm...

Damn near a copy paste from his previous "when is 1.2 comming out"

and dont call me a Pimp you can call me Sir.


What.....my torpedoes hit the Japanese battleship fore, port side AND aft


I dont see the confusion in your sig. Yes you hit the front, middle, and rear of the port side. Good shooting.

[Mudrik]

1.3?! LMAO! At the rate of current progress it will be version 1.9 that should fix all the problems with the game and then 2 months later they'll release Silent Hunter 5 and it'll be bugged to hell!

[Grunt]

First in order of merit is ditch the corny forced retirement setup. 4 patrols sinking 100,000 tons each time then being told you suck and tossed out of the service.

Other then that the game is fairly playable with 1.2, but not overly so.

[joea]

First in order of merit is ditch the corny forced retirement setup. 4 patrols sinking 100,000 tons each time then being told you suck and tossed out of the service.

Other then that the game is fairly playable with 1.2, but not overly so.

Geeez this is so frustrating. :damn: No commander went through the whole war!!! It's not a bug nor "corny" even successful commanders were retired.

[hyperion2206]

First in order of merit is ditch the corny forced retirement setup. 4 patrols sinking 100,000 tons each time then being told you suck and tossed out of the service.

Other then that the game is fairly playable with 1.2, but not overly so.
Geeez this is so frustrating. :damn: No commander went through the whole war!!! It's not a bug nor "corny" even successful commanders were retired.

If I wanted full realism I would have enlisted in the German Navy, but I want to have fun and being retired after 6 patrols or so isn't fun at all.
So if you want that kind of realism that's just fine, but what we want is not your business.

[joea]

If I wanted full realism I would have enlisted in the German Navy, but I want to have fun and being retired after 6 patrols or so isn't fun at all.
So if you want that kind of realism that's just fine, but what we want is not your business.
That was uncalled for, the guy said it was corny and implied it was a bug cause he was successful, I said it was not. I grant you it ought to be an option.

That said, a lot of these whines along the lines of why circling torpedoes, why I can't dive with a punctured pressure hull etc. are going to kill the subsim genre.

Hello Rayman - attack of the killer Bunnies as Neal himself stated.

[AVGWarhawk]

First in order of merit is ditch the corny forced retirement setup. 4 patrols sinking 100,000 tons each time then being told you suck and tossed out of the service.

Other then that the game is fairly playable with 1.2, but not overly so.
Geeez this is so frustrating. :damn: No commander went through the whole war!!! It's not a bug nor "corny" even successful commanders were retired.
If I wanted full realism I would have enlisted in the German Navy, but I want to have fun and being retired after 6 patrols or so isn't fun at all.
So if you want that kind of realism that's just fine, but what we want is not your business.
Dang, were is the love? Should be an option in the game to run as real number of patrols and playing until wars end. I can see where you worked hard to get your crew as best as they can be and then, wham, desk job:down: In all reality, skippers did stand down after 4-5 patrols. So then the option to have this or extend the patrols should be added or modded. Maybe like, a message after patrol that says, retire or get new sub. Let the player decide.

[kakemann]

If I wanted full realism I would have enlisted in the German Navy, but I want to have fun and being retired after 6 patrols or so isn't fun at all.
So if you want that kind of realism that's just fine, but what we want is not your business.
That was uncalled for, the guy said it was corny and implied it was a bug cause he was successful, I said it was not. I grant you it ought to be an option.

That said, a lot of these whines along the lines of why circling torpedoes, why I can't dive with a punctured pressure hull etc. are going to kill the subsim genre.

Hello Rayman - attack of the killer Bunnies as Neal himself stated.

By the way, joea!

Congratulations with your 2600 - post :up:

[Gigalocus]

Wow, people are never happy ..... me included :up:

but remember: a patch is never late, nor is it ever early, it arrives precisly when it meens to :rock:

[Egan]

ought to [/B]be an option.

That said, a lot of these whines along the lines of why circling torpedoes, why I can't dive with a punctured pressure hull etc. are going to kill the subsim genre.
d.

Couldn't agree more on both points.

[CCIP]

I'll agree with the original poster on the fact that 1.3 is needed!

When? At the current rate, I'd give it at least a month. And not expect ALL the things fixed, either.

Otherwise I sense another squabble between the 'realism' and the 'gameplay' crowds. Easy people, easy.

For one, I do think it's highly unfair that people get pissed over features that they don't like and start calling them bugs or putting down the game because of it. If they'd looked at the reasoning behind them, maybe there'd be a little less animosity. I mean it's along the same line as a lot of movies with controversial endings - people get all wound up about the fact that it wasn't the ending they wanted, instead of actually remembering the rest of the movie or trying to see what the director might've been trying to say...

[shad43]

Dang, were is the love? Should be an option in the game to run as real number of patrols and playing until wars end. I can see where you worked hard to get your crew as best as they can be and then, wham, desk job:down: In all reality, skippers did stand down after 4-5 patrols. So then the option to have this or extend the patrols should be added or modded. Maybe like, a message after patrol that says, retire or get new sub. Let the player decide.
I agree with Hawk, we all know the behavior is historical but it would be nice to have a choice, I've looked into the files for this and it seems the meat & potatoes of it are hardcoded into the sh4.exe, altering the associated upc files does not change the mechanics of career track, maybe some hex-editing whiz can figure it out.

Meanwhile I'll simply start an early war career and when it ends start the next career as close to the end date of the previous one as possible, this way I can chain them together and make it to the end of the war, each new career is just a new command with a new crew to train and I can keep track of my boats and tonnages as I go. :up:

*don't call me sir, I work for a living - but anything is better than pimp!*

[Drokkon]

The forced retirement issue should be a option. Heck it would be cool to let the war run forever if you are successful enough. Not everything needs to be simulated to be fun. Could you image opening your box and finding a very stinky sock and a rag soaked in diesel to simulate the smell on board.

[heartc]

The forced retirement issue should be a option. Heck it would be cool to let the war run forever if you are successful enough. Not everything needs to be simulated to be fun.

Hell yes! I tell you I hated SHIII. I could not see why they let the war end in 1945 - I was looking forward to taking on 688Is and whatnot in my trusty Type II. On Mars, mind you. What we got was neither.

;)

[Drokkon]

Heartc you crack me up.:rotfl: I was meaning the game would remain a snapshot in time. If you wanted to you could still be patroling the north Atlantic for all eternity like the Flying Dutchman. It's on you computer anything could be simulated alternate realities where the germans held out till the 1980s and beyond.

[Subsim Monitor]

ought to [/b]be an option.

That said, a lot of these whines along the lines of why circling torpedoes, why I can't dive with a punctured pressure hull etc. are going to kill the subsim genre.
d.

Couldn't agree more on both points.

Yes, seeing the same thing. Consequence of a public forum attracting a lot of casual (very casual) gamers into the subsim genre. Hopefully as time passes, they will learn and enjoy.

[walsh2509]

Bottom line, as per other posts on this, 1.2 did fix some of the bugs and there are still some outstanding as per 1.0 1.1 but not only that, 1.2 has created some of its own.

[Hartmann]

I hope that they have planned a lot of patches

If they release the patches too fast perhaps devs can´t fix all bugs or the more importants.
Two more only for the 1.4 :hmm:

[Snowman999]

I hope that they have planned a lot of patches


I'm afraid they did, but are re-planning now. If there's a 1.3 it should hit about the time the magazine full reviews hit the streets. They're probably going to mostly be in the 7.0 range, and will mention lots of bugs, even those that reviewed 1.1.

I don't know how sales are going from my one store survey, but it isn't flying off the shelf according to store employees. I havne't seen any marketing yet either (no Sunday circulars w/price promotion.)

Given how complex the reported problems are I wonder if Ubi management might just cut losses with 1.3. Or even 1.2.

Has anybody here who talks to the devs got any feel for how the wind is blowing?

[USS_shipmaster]

I think that UBIsoft and Devs team have to solve all major issues in gameplay:
--- as guys said before forced retirement has to be optional or as a penalty for shooting POW etc
--- chronometer issue ( see manual its there!!!! )
--- sonar / radar bugs
--- damage model

regards VK

[Snowman999]

I think that UBIsoft and Devs team have to solve all major issues in gameplay:
--- as guys said before forced retirement has to be optional or as a penalty for shooting POW etc
--- chronometer issue ( see manual its there!!!! )
--- sonar / radar bugs
--- damage model

regards VK

"Have to" as in "ethically should" or as in "leglaly required"? Because that license we all clicked across without reading it doesn't obligate them to do anything.

[USS_shipmaster]

Yeah... ethics-smtetics, legal -unlegal -shmaklegal whatever ...
Fine print agreements etc etc etc... Nobody seriously talking about moral and ethical obligations.... As Edgar Poe once said "we leave in the modern country that we have everything that money can buy" including justice. Ethics was sold in August 6 and 9 ,1945.

[bruschi sauro]

Wow, people are never happy ..... me included :up:

but remember: a patch is never late, nor is it ever early, it arrives precisly when it meens to :rock:ok you are right.
But i am never happy so:x ....so I WANT THR PATCH 1.3 NOW..:rotfl: :rotfl:

[TDK1044]

Patches are usually budgeted for as part of the project. However, it's typical for a company like Ubisoft to budget for two or three critical patches after release.

Patch 1.3 is possible, depending on Ubisoft's assessment of the game patched to 1.2. Of course, members here and at other Forums will always have an endless list of things they want patches to fix, but in the end, Ubisoft will make the call based on what they consider to be critical.

I think 1.3 is possible. Anything beyond that is highly unlikely in my view.

[DragonRR1]

Patches are usually budgeted for as part of the project. However, it's typical for a company like Ubisoft to budget for two or three critical patches after release.

Patch 1.3 is possible, depending on Ubisoft's assessment of the game patched to 1.2. Of course, members here and at other Forums will always have an endless list of things they want patches to fix, but in the end, Ubisoft will make the call based on what they consider to be critical.

I think 1.3 is possible. Anything beyond that is highly unlikely in my view.

I sincerely hope you are wrong! In my view UBI must be aware that unless 1.3 is a long way off (which will annoy the community) 1.3 is unlikely to fix all the hard coded issues. I hope that given the fact that we had 1.4(b) with SH3 and the fact that SH4 was released way too early they will allow the devs to at least work up to a 1.4.

[fredbass]

In my view UBI must be aware that unless 1.3 is a long way off (which will annoy the community) 1.3 is unlikely to fix all the hard coded issues. I hope that given the fact that we had 1.4(b) with SH3 and the fact that SH4 was released way too early they will allow the devs to at least work up to a 1.4.

Aren't you getting a little ahead of yourself? We haven't even seen 1.3 yet. :lol: :doh:

[DragonRR1]

In my view UBI must be aware that unless 1.3 is a long way off (which will annoy the community) 1.3 is unlikely to fix all the hard coded issues. I hope that given the fact that we had 1.4(b) with SH3 and the fact that SH4 was released way too early they will allow the devs to at least work up to a 1.4.

Aren't you getting a little ahead of yourself? We haven't even seen 1.3 yet. :lol: :doh:

I feel safe in the knowledge that UBI just don't need the hassle of a large number of very angry people pounding on their door :o

[TDK1044]

Ubisoft will assess the game patched to 1.2. Their assessment will determine whether 1.3 is needed. Bear in mind, their assessment and ours is very different. Hopefully, they will allow 1.3. I'd be very surprised to see any patches beyond 1.3 though.

[DragonRR1]

Ubisoft will assess the game patched to 1.2. Their assessment will determine whether 1.3 is needed. Bear in mind, their assessment and ours is very different. Hopefully, they will allow 1.3. I'd be very surprised to see any patches beyond 1.3 though.

Yup they will assess it from a purely commercial point of view. However in the past games have received patches from "reluctant" publishers due to community pressure. At the end of the day the community has to matter to publishers because they rely on us for their finance.

My honest view is that I would be a little surprised we don't see a 1.4 if there are any major (non moddable) bugs following 1.3. If there is no 1.3 I will be somewhat irritated!!

[mookiemookie]

I'd be happy if the convoy speed bugs are worked out. Attacking a convoy and having them all stop in their tracks so you can conveniently take them all out is a game breaker, I'd say.

I can live without everything else.

Hopefully there's a 1.3 in the works. I bet there is.

[Snowman999]

Yeah... ethics-smtetics, legal -unlegal -shmaklegal whatever ...
Fine print agreements etc etc etc... Nobody seriously talking about moral and ethical obligations.... As Edgar Poe once said "we leave in the modern country that we have everything that money can buy" including justice. Ethics was sold in August 6 and 9 ,1945.

You didn't answer the quesiton.

[Snowman999]

I think 1.3 is possible. Anything beyond that is highly unlikely in my view.


I tend to agree, with absolutely no data of course. <g>

BUT, a big but, if they figure SH4 is the end of the line for the series, and internal volume reports are underwhelming, I could see them cutting losses and dropping that patch budget to the bottom line right now.

[Tomp]

I think 1.3 is possible. Anything beyond that is highly unlikely in my view.


I tend to agree, with absolutely no data of course. <g>

BUT, a big but, if they figure SH4 is the end of the line for the series, and internal volume reports are underwhelming, I could see them cutting losses and dropping that patch budget to the bottom line right now.

That's true but as they say, you're only as good as your last performance. Ubi produced some hot titles with Chessmaster, Ghost Recon, etc. But if the word gets out that they are leaving a game in the state that SH4 is in their reputation will suffer and future buyers may not jump on new titles like they do now.

Let's hope someone at UBI learns a lesson.

As for 1.2, at least the game is marginally playable now.

Tom P.

Frustration can be defines by 3 carriers, 2 battleships, and 1 torpedo.

[hellas1]

Hello sub pimps and pimpettes, :|\\

It seems I've stirred the "Atlantic waters" of this forum. Good for discussion.

Now, Let's put pressure on Ubi to commit to patch 1.3.
:rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock:

hellas1 :|\\

[TheBrauerHour]

I hope that they have planned a lot of patches


I don't know how sales are going from my one store survey, but it isn't flying off the shelf according to store employees. I havne't seen any marketing yet either (no Sunday circulars w/price promotion.)

Given how complex the reported problems are I wonder if Ubi management might just cut losses with 1.3. Or even 1.2.

Has anybody here who talks to the devs got any feel for how the wind is blowing?

Since I bought this game, 5 of my friends have bought it and several are planning to. Heck, we are starting a SH4 "unit", where we post patrol logs and all get on Teamspeak and chill out and talk while playing, it really is a blast. Don't forget that games like these have a strong word of mouth following as well.

As far as patches go, I am happy with 1.2 so far, and do hope more patches will come, because they can only make this great game better. But they could also do what Infinity Ward did with COD2 and hit the eject button and leave everyone hanging with a game not at full potential. Something tells me Ubisoft will come through for us. Give them a chance to catch their breaths after 1.2 and they can start on 1.3.

After all, at 100% realism, I need that stopwatch doohickey to tell speed. I am tired of 3 hits out of 12 torps. :lol:

[FIREWALL]

First in order of merit is ditch the corny forced retirement setup. 4 patrols sinking 100,000 tons each time then being told you suck and tossed out of the service.

Other then that the game is fairly playable with 1.2, but not overly so.
Geeez this is so frustrating. :damn: No commander went through the whole war!!! It's not a bug nor "corny" even successful commanders were retired.
If I wanted full realism I would have enlisted in the German Navy, but I want to have fun and being retired after 6 patrols or so isn't fun at all.
So if you want that kind of realism that's just fine, but what we want is not your business.
Dang, were is the love? Should be an option in the game to run as real number of patrols and playing until wars end. I can see where you worked hard to get your crew as best as they can be and then, wham, desk job:down: In all reality, skippers did stand down after 4-5 patrols. So then the option to have this or extend the patrols should be added or modded. Maybe like, a message after patrol that says, retire or get new sub. Let the player decide.

Hi AVG It is there .Click no and you get a new sub and negitive 750 renoun.

[FIREWALL]

Patches are usually budgeted for as part of the project. However, it's typical for a company like Ubisoft to budget for two or three critical patches after release.

Patch 1.3 is possible, depending on Ubisoft's assessment of the game patched to 1.2. Of course, members here and at other Forums will always have an endless list of things they want patches to fix, but in the end, Ubisoft will make the call based on what they consider to be critical.

I think 1.3 is possible. Anything beyond that is highly unlikely in my view.


SH-3 1.4 patch ????:hmm:

[Camaero]

1.3 should get things close, but it seems to be their style to leave a few bugs that mods can't fix. :lol: I sort of doubt there will be a 1.4 unless 1.3 is just a quick fix on one or two things.

[USS_shipmaster]

I dont see any reason for UBIsoft to make more patches except "fair play"business practice. If they really decide that SH4 is the their last project in subsim series fair play is only reason to make final 1.3 patch to finish all main announced(sorry 4 spelling) features like chronometer , radar / sonar bugs etc.
No legal sanctions can be used to force it. (????) I hope I answered your question, if not pls do not hesitate to ask it again in more broad form.
Thanx. VK.

[USS_shipmaster]

P.S. But UBIsoft understands(?) that they can loose market of approximately 200'000 buyers if they did not patch the game to appropriate (like it promised in their manual) condition.
I dont think that appearance of the patch 1.4 has a good probability. patch 1.3 is maximum that we can expect from Ubi

[Torpex752]

The CO of the Crevalle, Henry G. "Hank" Munson did something like 8 war patrols. I think it was 5 or 6 on "Crevalle", and 2 or 3 on "Rasher".

Frank
:cool:

[tater]

I want REEFS.

tater

[TDK1044]

Patches are usually budgeted for as part of the project. However, it's typical for a company like Ubisoft to budget for two or three critical patches after release.

Patch 1.3 is possible, depending on Ubisoft's assessment of the game patched to 1.2. Of course, members here and at other Forums will always have an endless list of things they want patches to fix, but in the end, Ubisoft will make the call based on what they consider to be critical.

I think 1.3 is possible. Anything beyond that is highly unlikely in my view.


SH-3 1.4 patch ????:hmm:

Looking at the history of SH3, there were still critical issues to resolve after 1.3. I don't see that here. With 1.2, the game is really very playable. Patch 1.3 will take care of any issues that Ubisoft consider to be 'outstanding critical issues'.

Obviously, members here will always want additional patches to fix what they consider to be critical, but I think Ubisoft will have a different view.

[Snacko]

Make the game Remember the Location of where you put the:

Gramaphone
Radio
Watch
Message Window
Event CameraIt is such a hassle to have to set this up every time you go to play SH4. Should be a simple thing to do.

[Snowman999]

I dont see any reason for UBIsoft to make more patches except "fair play"business practice. If they really decide that SH4 is the their last project in subsim series fair play is only reason to make final 1.3 patch to finish all main announced(sorry 4 spelling) features like chronometer , radar / sonar bugs etc.
No legal sanctions can be used to force it. (????) I hope I answered your question, if not pls do not hesitate to ask it again in more broad form.
Thanx. VK.

No, I'm good. I agree they have no legal obligation. If they're walking away from the series I think it's doubtful there will be a 1.4, and about 50-50 a 1.3.

[Harry Buttle]

Looking at the history of SH3, there were still critical issues to resolve after 1.3. I don't see that here. With 1.2, the game is really very playable. Patch 1.3 will take care of any issues that Ubisoft consider to be 'outstanding critical issues'.



under 1.2 Radar doesn't work, convoys stop when you hit a ship, escorts can only locate you on the surface, the rate of air attacks is far beyond that which is historical, the AA gun has visual artifacts (caused by the gunners position swinging through the side of the boat) that frequently prevent you sighting the weapon, the torpedo doors only open one at a time, the torpedo won't stay set on 'contact', you can see through crew members - the list goes on.

1.2 is usable, not playable - if Ubi leave it like this, they've lost me as a future customer.

I hope 1.3 is a couple of months away, there is that much work to do - Silent Hunter IV was released WAY too early.