SH4 just plain unappealing!

[benetofski]

Ok, first off - I like UBISOFT Games and I have continually played SH2 and SH3 - and (kind of hesitantly) finally 'gave in' and bought SH4 - having passed it on the shelves a few times

(I have also recently finished all the GRAW (Ghost Recon) levels (but still periodically play SH3) and needed a new game to fill time in until GRAW-2 comes out in June.

I for one, didnt rush out and beat a path to EB to pick up SH4 because I kinda realized there might be some issues, that unfortunately, await the submarine playing community or the devs at UBISOFT to crawl all over and fix...

It seems to me, there is a lot of 'fixin' to do!

Well, for starters, I tell you IMHO it doesnt appear to compare to SH3 (in both graphics and game play) and I have a TOTL Gamers high end (Intel) machine, with dual cores and dual SLI GPU's, so I am not talking hardware here but actual renderings (radar/sonar as an example) and actual game play (stations) functions.

Also, looking in the data bundles, I can still see fragments of SH3 in there along with debug calls, so I suspect... the engine is the still basically the same but with new modules pegged on - admitedly there is a ton of code in there to remap the World etcetra but we should be expecting (at least) something comparable to what we would expect to see on a Wii or XBox 360 Screen NO?

So I think I will throw in the towel on SH4 and just say - it's disappointing to me individually but for those out there that are prepared to patch or mod it to death - you have more patience (or time) than me!

Finally, (as always) I applaud the modders out there that will spend immeasurable hours working on the fixes.

Remember, this is not knocking UBISOFT - but my personal disappointment (I am still planning to buy GRAW-2 and other UBISOFT products) they, after all, are no different to Microsoft who produced 'Flight Sim X' (I have that too!) and the forums there reflect similar feelings that the communities will be the ones to correct the game shortfalls!

report ends, benetofski fell overboard!

[CCIP]

Not totally sure what you're getting at to be honest. Eh? Xbox and Wii? WII of all things? :doh:


I sure as hell hoped and prayed that SHIV wouldn't be like something I'd expect on a console, and fortunately it wasn't.

Otherwise, eh... whatever you get buoyancy from I suppose.

[shmall]

I can see where you're coming from on "gameplay" (too many bugs still) but Graphics are far better in SH4?

I run at 1920x1200 with AF 16x and FSAA 4x and its looks awesome imho :)



Simon

[Grunt]

I think the ubi marketing people took time to review the fan base of SH3, most likely by stopping by this forum on a regular basis.

I guess the ubi guys figured out that our loyalty to SH3 would make it very easy for ubi to stick it to us by releasing a VERY beta game, then laugh all the way to bank with no plans to continue the SH series.

Kinda like those fast food adverts you see on TV, where the sandwich is all big and juice and awesome looking...then when you actually buy it it looks like someone spat on it, sat on it, shat on it, then shoved it in your face.

Moral of the story, dont beleive the hype. And avoid buying any ubi games in the future if you possibly can.

[Takeda Shingen]

I think the ubi marketing people took time to review the fan base of SH3, most likely by stopping by this forum on a regular basis.

I guess the ubi guys figured out that our loyalty to SH3 would make it very easy for ubi to stick it to us by releasing a VERY beta game, then laugh all the way to bank with no plans to continue the SH series.

Kinda like those fast food adverts you see on TV, where the sandwich is all big and juice and awesome looking...then when you actually buy it it looks like someone spat on it, sat on it, shat on it, then shoved it in your face.

Moral of the story, dont beleive the hype. And avoid buying any ubi games in the future if you possibly can.

Yeah, but UBI is a cover for the Greys. Neal's on the payroll too, which makes SubSim a vast data-collection agency. Soon, there will be enough information collected to begin the genetic alteration process. The truth is out there.

Let's try to remember that we are talking about a computer game. Niccolo Machiavelli would have more important matters of concern.

[-Pv-]

I hope you'll be selling your copies on ebay so someone else can enjoy it.
-Pv-

[DragonRR1]

I think the ubi marketing people took time to review the fan base of SH3, most likely by stopping by this forum on a regular basis.

I guess the ubi guys figured out that our loyalty to SH3 would make it very easy for ubi to stick it to us by releasing a VERY beta game, then laugh all the way to bank with no plans to continue the SH series.

Kinda like those fast food adverts you see on TV, where the sandwich is all big and juice and awesome looking...then when you actually buy it it looks like someone spat on it, sat on it, shat on it, then shoved it in your face.

Moral of the story, dont beleive the hype. And avoid buying any ubi games in the future if you possibly can.

I think you are being a little unfair Grunt. Neither the devs nor UBI would have actually wanted to release the game in the state it was in and to some extent still is in. Clearly UBI have forced the devs to finish off for the release date but UBI themselves have pressure from shareholders, marketing and distribution to release products at a certain price point and within certain timescales. Unfortunately SH4 has suffered as a result.

[Fearless]

I think you are being a little unfair Grunt. Neither the devs nor UBI would have actually wanted to release the game in the state it was in and to some extent still is in. Clearly UBI have forced the devs to finish off for the release date but UBI themselves have pressure from shareholders, marketing and distribution to release products at a certain price point and within certain timescales. Unfortunately SH4 has suffered as a result.

That's true, it's all about money and that is why software products are pushed out into the market regardless of the state it's in.

[ReallyDedPoet]

I have continually played SH2

Continually played SH2 ( PA I hope ) and giving up on SH4 this early.
Enough said here:yep:

RDP

[joea]

I have continually played SH2
Continually played SH2 ( PA I hope ) and giving up on SH4 this early.
Enough said here:yep:

RDP

Sh2 was a real mess compared to what I see here or with SH3.

[geetrue]

I hope you'll be selling your copies on ebay so someone else can enjoy it.
-Pv-

That's the funniest thing I've heard since SH4 came out ... :rotfl:

[mookiemookie]

I think the ubi marketing people took time to review the fan base of SH3, most likely by stopping by this forum on a regular basis.

I guess the ubi guys figured out that our loyalty to SH3 would make it very easy for ubi to stick it to us by releasing a VERY beta game, then laugh all the way to bank with no plans to continue the SH series.


http://home.no.net/holodoc/ordinary1.jpg

I WANT TO BELIEVE!

[ReallyDedPoet]

I have continually played SH2
Continually played SH2 ( PA I hope ) and giving up on SH4 this early.
Enough said here:yep:

RDP
Sh2 was a real mess compared to what I see here or with SH3.

SH3 was a hugh step forward from SH2, SH4 is not a huge step from SH3. But there is potential for sure for it to be a solid game, the show is not over yet.

RDP

[Kataki]

Ok, first off - I like UBISOFT Games and I have continually played SH2 and SH3 - and (kind of hesitantly) finally 'gave in' and bought SH4 - having passed it on the shelves a few times

(I have also recently finished all the GRAW (Ghost Recon) levels (but still periodically play SH3) and needed a new game to fill time in until GRAW-2 comes out in June.

I for one, didnt rush out and beat a path to EB to pick up SH4 because I kinda realized there might be some issues, that unfortunately, await the submarine playing community or the devs at UBISOFT to crawl all over and fix...

It seems to me, there is a lot of 'fixin' to do!

Well, for starters, I tell you IMHO it doesnt appear to compare to SH3 (in both graphics and game play) and I have a TOTL Gamers high end (Intel) machine, with dual cores and dual SLI GPU's, so I am not talking hardware here but actual renderings (radar/sonar as an example) and actual game play (stations) functions.

Also, looking in the data bundles, I can still see fragments of SH3 in there along with debug calls, so I suspect... the engine is the still basically the same but with new modules pegged on - admitedly there is a ton of code in there to remap the World etcetra but we should be expecting (at least) something comparable to what we would expect to see on a Wii or XBox 360 Screen NO?

So I think I will throw in the towel on SH4 and just say - it's disappointing to me individually but for those out there that are prepared to patch or mod it to death - you have more patience (or time) than me!

Finally, (as always) I applaud the modders out there that will spend immeasurable hours working on the fixes.

Remember, this is not knocking UBISOFT - but my personal disappointment (I am still planning to buy GRAW-2 and other UBISOFT products) they, after all, are no different to Microsoft who produced 'Flight Sim X' (I have that too!) and the forums there reflect similar feelings that the communities will be the ones to correct the game shortfalls!

report ends, benetofski fell overboard!
From the sound of it you are playing a different game...

Some comparison pics..

External view of a sub SH4
http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2517/sh4imgaa1gh5.jpg

External view of the Yamato SH4
http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r310/JMES2006/sh42007-04-1721-44-35-12.jpg

External view of the bismark SH3
http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/7580/eugenbismarckgood1ve.jpg

External view of a sub SH3
http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/6494/surface1ho.jpg

If you cant tell that SH4 is a much better looking game then you are blind. Now as far as gameplay/stability goes I agree, SH4 is a rushed game.

Read the forums for tweaks to help you game run better. I have a older computer and can still run sh4 at 20 fps with pretty much every graphical setting I want on.

[Dimitrius07]

You know what, i will add some of my opinion. <EDIT:That's a real no no here> the game from the internet. Before the relize of the game as a huge fan of the SH3 and thise website, i told to my self - i will not be a moron ho like everything for free and i will pay for the product and yes i buy the damn game, and what i get is a beta game filed up with stooped program mistakes. And who is the moron now :stare: .

Sad but fact - i still can`t play the game i` am wating for a patch, meanwile i playing SH3 and Stalker

[John Channing]

If you can't play the game then there is something wrong with your set-up. I have been playing it continuously since it was released and to say that you can't play it is hyperbole, nothing less.

JCC

[CCIP]

Naturally also, you won't get much play value out of it when the game's protection system intentionally breaks game mechanics if you use a pirated version :hmm:

[THE_MASK]

Its hard to take you seriously with an avatar like that .

[TheBrauerHour]

I like SH4. Is there something wrong with me? :doh:

My biggest problem is I need a good American Sub movie to watch before playing. I always watch Das Boot to get hyped up to shoot some torpedoes, but it makes me want to re-install SH3!!! :lol:

[bonz]

I thought SHIII was half-assed but SHIV tops it. This game is a mess. Pretty, but who cares.
I'm on my third mission to drop off an agent. Haven't gotten an order to escort the agent into the Ginza, but it wouldn't surprise me. My flak gunner is the highest scoring ace in the Pacific Theater with 20 air kills. Don't even bother to dive anymore as all I have to do is accelerate time and I'll draw zeros 1000 nm from land. They carry large belly tanks you understand.....

I upgraded to a forward deck gun. It's there, I can see it....but I'm the only one who can use it because my management board shows a forward and aft deck gun with no slots for crew members.

What's radar? I see it spinning out there but visual rules are in effect.
I surface and expect the exec to handle the transition to normal propulsion rather than batteries. He's off having breakfast so it never happens.

So, the crew is useless...except for my ace. I handle everything else on the boat

[Dimitrius07]

If you can't play the game then there is something wrong with your set-up. I have been playing it continuously since it was released and to say that you can't play it is hyperbole, nothing less.

JCC

No hard feelings mate ;) but everything okay with my setup. I saw some topics when people, gamers like me camplaine about the same problems as i do in the game. Sorry about my previes post i ` am little rush that all and again i apologise for my bad English is still not perfect :nope:

[GT182]

Clearly UBI have forced the devs to finish off for the release date but UBI themselves have pressure from shareholders, marketing and distribution to release products at a certain price point and within certain timescales. Unfortunately SH4 has suffered as a result.

Yeah and I hope most of those shareholders bought SH3 and 4 so they can see what was pushed out the door. :yep: They should be ashamed... period. Shareholders only get money when they sell stocks, and they shouldn't be a part of the "forcing it on you before it's done correctly" process. Marketing, distribution and release dates not withshtanding, should only be based on when it's a done deal that the games are not some beta production for the public to test.

Shareholders for Ford, GM, Chrysler and the rest don't force unassembled unfinished cars out on the dealers lots for us to buy. Ubi should be held to the same standards by their shareholders... and the FTC. :yep:

So the shareholder idea for blame is a bunch of horse hockey.

[tycho102]

Well, for starters, I tell you IMHO it doesnt appear to compare to SH3 (in both graphics and game play)

I'm glad you made this thread, because I didn't have to start a new one.

Up 'til now, I've been running mostly stock. I modified the aircraft probability to knock down on air attacks (still get 3-12 per patrol), and the "green lamp" mod. So, I just finished up Stalker and got back onto SH4. Loaded v1.2, and a bunch of mods:

-60m water visibility
-Beery's free-camera
-De-saturated colored torpedoes
-Depth mod
-Battery mod
-Default torp loadouts (plenty of renown, too much mark-23 dragging)
-Keyboard mod (weather reports, DBK, attack map on F6)
-Torpedo wake
-A few other things...

Wow. What a difference!
The graphics are still great but the underwater shots are phenomenal. Really made a functional improvement to the game with respect to the controls.

However, I will agree with the original poster that the SH3 patrol music is superior. Some of the attack music (stalker? hunter? tension?) is good, but for just cruising the world map, SH3 wins the gold. Could be that Eastern Europeans just know what the heck goes well with u-boats -- although I'm not entirely certain I would call it "traditional German music". Certainly has a slight European accent to it.

Anyway, eeeeeeeevvvvvvvvvorbody over to the SH4 mods thread (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=108964).

[mookiemookie]

Clearly UBI have forced the devs to finish off for the release date but UBI themselves have pressure from shareholders, marketing and distribution to release products at a certain price point and within certain timescales. Unfortunately SH4 has suffered as a result.
Yeah and I hope most of those shareholders bought SH3 and 4 so they can see what was pushed out the door. :yep: They should be ashamed... period. Shareholders only get money when they sell stocks, and they shouldn't be a part of the "forcing it on you before it's done correctly" process. Marketing, distribution and release dates not withshtanding, should only be based on when it's a done deal that the games are not some beta production for the public to test.

Shareholders for Ford, GM, Chrysler and the rest don't force unassembled unfinished cars out on the dealers lots for us to buy. Ubi should be held to the same standards by their shareholders... and the FTC. :yep:

So the shareholder idea for blame is a bunch of horse hockey.

A company issues shares of stock. The shareholders who own this stock are paid dividends. Dividends come from the profits of the company. A game that's rushed out the door so it looks good on the quarterly report makes for profits, which means bigger dividends for the shareholders. :know:

[GT182]

Yeah and when shareholders finally find out what they did in "pushing it out" they'll kick their own butts hopefully. I've been a shareholder and I never was a part of what they're doing for Ub. Once they see sales fall off because SH4 isn't all it's cracked up to be, then they'll just love the falling stock prices for Ubi. No one to blame but themselves... IF and only IF they did the "pushing". Which I don't for one minute think they did. Shareholdrs aren't the same idiots as the corporate ones are. Corporate pushes to make money for themselves, Shareholders ride the wave and share the profit. And when the waves fizzle out, then they make bigger waves to cancel out the corporate's f*%#ups.

[John Channing]

Let's keep things in perspective here.

Ubisoft is a billion dollar a year company. If you think a few pissed off rivet counters on Subsim.com are going to affect their share prices...

They sell more copies of whatever crap Tom Clancy is putting his name on before breakfast than they will of Silent Hunter 4 in the next 10 years.

And as to your car company anaolgy... clearly you haven't bought the first model year of any product by any of the companies you named (or any other car company for that matter).

JCC

[SinisterDexter]

Let's keep things in perspective here.

They sell more copies of whatever crap Tom Clancy is putting his name on before breakfast than they will of Silent Hunter 4 in the next 10 years.

JCC

And the PC port of Splinter Cell: Double Agent was about as broken and buggy as SH4. I think it got one patch but, was still a dissapointing waste of time.

Fortunately, SH4 has a good mod community and Ubisoft seems willing to support at least a couple of patches from the dev team.

[Fearless]

I always have to laugh how cars are compared to pc games.:rotfl:

People, we are talking about software here... Not hardware. One could say that a polution emissions computer processor in a Ford wouldn't work in a Chrysler because of a different setup and they are 'different'.

So to get back to the point, EVERY COMPUTER has different setups and that's why the pc game may not work properly on one system than on another. So stop comparing apples with tree stumps unless they are the same (Last time I looked they weren't!!!)

[U-Bones]

180 off there.
disappointing perhaps, but only because it -is- so appealing.

[Ragtag]

The big point is that games are being pushed out way to early and i'm not talkin about SH4 alone. This is starting to be a bad habit for games distributors. I'm working as a editor at a Norwegian games magazine and games are, unfortunatley, being released earlier and earlier and i see this more and more often and it get's worse. Several big titles lately has been released in a very poor state, Stalker is definatly one of them and if you take a peak in the Stalker forums you will find screams for a patch. Yes, developers are fixing things in patches but releasing a game they KNOW is full of bugs and more or less unfinished, is just not acceptable. I want to play games as they are intended to be played. Mods are fun and great but it's not the gamers job to make a game playable.We pay for a product, some hardcore gamers buy 2-4 games each month, and they do expect to get a game that IS FINISHED. So do i. I don't want to read forums, search through tons of mods just to have a game in a playable state.When i buy a game i want to play it. Not wait a month or 4 to have it fixed and then play it. I really don't like the "rush out, fix some later and forget" policy some of the big companies has started to use. I wonder what would happen if every gamer waited a month or two before buying.

[NEON DEON]

Let's keep things in perspective here.

Ubisoft is a billion dollar a year company. If you think a few pissed off rivet counters on Subsim.com are going to affect their share prices...

They sell more copies of whatever crap Tom Clancy is putting his name on before breakfast than they will of Silent Hunter 4 in the next 10 years.

And as to your car company anaolgy... clearly you haven't bought the first model year of any product by any of the companies you named (or any other car company for that matter).

JCC

I bought the first model year of the 1990 Honda Accord. It is seventeen years old now and I love it. The suspension system is so well tuned that the tires exceed the rated tread life! 200,000 miles with the original transmission and no car payments for 12 years. I love my Honda.
:D :D :D

BTW: I am talking specific model generations within the Accord name.
1990 to 1993 (fourth generation)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Accord

[JSF]

Here we go again....another discussion on the poor devs forced to submit to the money whores who own UBIsoft. Jesus, enough already......

The game was a hugh endeavor that required a tremendous effort and a lot of luck to be a success. Two outa three aint bad. (Meatloaf)

If the CTDs continue at the rate I get them I will have to rate it down there with FC. I can't complete a single patrol without a CTD anylonger.

But like everyone else, I agree, the graphics are splendid. TDC is quirky though. Crew dialog (AI) is clumsy....and a host of other quasi acceptable gaming peculiarities tend to make SH4 unpleasent to play in its current state.

I will continue to hope for the best and keep checking back in the forum at different intervals to see if progress has been made towards a resolution of the cornucopia of issues.

PS..one major positive is this forum. You guys will eventually sort out SH4.

[John Channing]

Let's keep things in perspective here.

Ubisoft is a billion dollar a year company. If you think a few pissed off rivet counters on Subsim.com are going to affect their share prices...

They sell more copies of whatever crap Tom Clancy is putting his name on before breakfast than they will of Silent Hunter 4 in the next 10 years.

And as to your car company anaolgy... clearly you haven't bought the first model year of any product by any of the companies you named (or any other car company for that matter).

JCC

I bought the first model year of the 1990 Honda Accord. It is seventeen years old now and I love it. The suspension system is so well tuned that the tires exceed the rated tread life! 200,000 miles with the original transmission and no car payments for 12 years. I love my Honda.
:D :D :D

BTW: I am talking specific model generations within the Accord name.
1990 to 1993 (fourth generation)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Accord

I was thinking more of the first model year of a line. A friend of mine bought one of the first CRVs that was out and the locks froze up everytime the temperature went below 0c. She spent a lot of time locked inside that car looking for heated garages to pull into so she could get out.

Not a good thing in Canada.

And don't get me started on Ford!

JCC

[maerean_m]

If the CTDs continue at the rate I get them I will have to rate it down there with FC. I can't complete a single patrol without a CTD anylonger.
What kind of video card to you use? How much memory does it have? Do you use Texture High Quality on?

[9th_cow]

bugs are the biggest pain in the butt, more than one of my careers has gone down the pan because of them, and given the huge traveling distances in game to finally reach your target and then lose out due to a bug is pretty terrible.
Graphics are stunning. most of the game works fine too, the flaws it has can be dissastrous unfortunatly.

i must admit the only real major gripes i still have are the fact that they obviously never bothered testing the AA guns, or they would have seen theyre unusable at some angles due to only being able to see the conning tower and not your gun.
and damage screen, there is no bloody way to tell what damage you have.
it seems to me now that once you have a little flooding, even contained the game decides to kill your sub after a set time limit.
i mean you repair the hull. the pumps work. why do you eventually end up dead after a little time passes ? what is causing me to suddenly die, when the damage screen says i have it under controll. ive no idea..

ah one last thing. i spot a task force, 3 destroyers, 1 18K passenger ship.
i report the sighting
im told to engage.
i sink a destroyer ( had no choice or i wouldnt have bothered)
i sink the 18K ship.

mission incomplete ? WTF?!? this applies equally to any of these intercept missions.
once i was told to sink a capital ship. i sank the only large navy ship in the convoy, mission incomplete... why ?
and patrol missions, seriously how long do i need to patrol ? forever....

rant over :)

[maerean_m]

In a Patrol Area objective all you have to do is to stay in an (aproximatively) 100 km circle for 48 hours. That's it. No need to sink any ships. Just stay alive for 48h.

[John Channing]

Plus, I believe, just because you have received instructions to do something else, you still have to complete all of your original patrol objectives.

Once you are finished sinking the taskforce, you still have to proceed to your original patrol area, complete that objective, radio in for new instructions, complete them, and then RTB when you are told to (just like real life).

I think a lot of people are assuming this is like SH3 where you could pretty well blow off your objectives and do what you wanted with only a minor loss of renown. This time around you had better follow orders, or there are consequences.

This is the method I have been using, and ComSubPac has been very happy with me.... so far.

JCC

[bruschi sauro]

I think the ubi marketing people took time to review the fan base of SH3, most likely by stopping by this forum on a regular basis.

I guess the ubi guys figured out that our loyalty to SH3 would make it very easy for ubi to stick it to us by releasing a VERY beta game, then laugh all the way to bank with no plans to continue the SH series.


http://home.no.net/holodoc/ordinary1.jpg

I WANT TO BELIEVE!:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[bruschi sauro]

The big point is that games are being pushed out way to early and i'm not talkin about SH4 alone. This is starting to be a bad habit for games distributors. I'm working as a editor at a Norwegian games magazine and games are, unfortunatley, being released earlier and earlier and i see this more and more often and it get's worse. Several big titles lately has been released in a very poor state, Stalker is definatly one of them and if you take a peak in the Stalker forums you will find screams for a patch. Yes, developers are fixing things in patches but releasing a game they KNOW is full of bugs and more or less unfinished, is just not acceptable. I want to play games as they are intended to be played. Mods are fun and great but it's not the gamers job to make a game playable.We pay for a product, some hardcore gamers buy 2-4 games each month, and they do expect to get a game that IS FINISHED. So do i. I don't want to read forums, search through tons of mods just to have a game in a playable state.When i buy a game i want to play it. Not wait a month or 4 to have it fixed and then play it. I really don't like the "rush out, fix some later and forget" policy some of the big companies has started to use. I wonder what would happen if every gamer waited a month or two before buying.
YOU ARE RIGHT:up:

[maerean_m]

ALL objectives given at the begining of the mission must be completed before RTB. Otherwise you won't be given a new set of objectives and you'll feel like the mission is repeating. In fact, is the same old mission.

[7Enigma]

In my humble opinion it is the DUTY of the reviewers to properly put these game companies in their places.

The reason why they continue to release games prior to being finished is because all to often they are met with great reviews with a small * mention of bugs. That shows me one of two things:

1. They pander to the game companies since those banners off to the sides are generally hyping their next big thing.

2. They don't adequately test the games, instead, spend a couple hours on the weekend and write up a review.

I was appalled to see the high ratings that SH4 got out of the box (v1.0). 1.2 is much better, but there is still so much here that needs to be fixed its incredible.

Until you get some reviews that harshly penalize (and thus hurt sales), the game companies have no reason to fix this trend.

My $0.02

[JSF]

If the CTDs continue at the rate I get them I will have to rate it down there with FC. I can't complete a single patrol without a CTD anylonger.
What kind of video card to you use? How much memory does it have? Do you use Texture High Quality on?

Nvidia 8800 GTS with 640 megs DDR3. Latest drivers as well.

[fredbass]

The reason why they continue to release games prior to being finished is because all to often they are met with great reviews with a small * mention of bugs.

Wrong - The reasons are based on agreements, budget and deadlines made and set at the beginning of development.

[maerean_m]

"Nvidia 8800 GTS with 640 megs DDR3. Latest drivers as well."

There should be no issue with such a powerful video card...

Do the CTDs happen when going from a 2D station (like navigation map or crew management) to a 3D station (like deck, deck gun, external camera)? Any kind of pattern?

[CaptainAsh]

I m a big fan of SH3 and was tempted to buy SHIV of course but read a lot here on the game. Honnestly, you re scary people ;)
It s impossible for me to buy the game right now with all you said.
So what s the logic thing to do?
Search for a demo of course! So I can see if it s that bad...
Here is the issue... I can t find any demo?!?!?!? Is UBI so worry about the quality of the software to avoid publishing a demo and just hopping some people will buy the game without testing it first?

[dean_acheson]

Well, like the man said, if you think that this game is problematic, you were not around for SH2.

I like SH4, I like it alot. Sure, I had to mess around with my graphic card settings to get it to work right, but after about ten minutes, no problems.

For goodness sakes, there must be a bazillion different types of computer setups, it ain't like making a console game where things are standardized....

:)

[Sailor Steve]

Well, like the man said, if you think that this game is problematic, you were not around for SH2.
Remember two years ago, when some were saying "SH3 is a total POS, just like SH2!"? Now they're using SH3 as a benchmark to criticize SH4.

[CaptainAsh]

Actualy I went to SH2 long time after it was out.
Same for SH3 I guess. Was patch 1.2 or 1.3 when I bought it.
As I m really into SH3, I was tempted to buy SHIV right now... with all I can read I can tell it doesn t look like a good idea.

[7Enigma]

The reason why they continue to release games prior to being finished is because all to often they are met with great reviews with a small * mention of bugs.

Wrong - The reasons are based on agreements, budget and deadlines made and set at the beginning of development.

And I would be willing to bet you if they received the proper bad press for releasing such an unfinished product, and thus also receiving poor sales figures, this trend would change. Gamers buy games based on 4 main factors:

1. The media blitz gets their attention and they buy based on hype

2. Review sites that say yay/nay

3. Friends/family/peers

4. Demo's or pirated versions

Businesses like money, plain and simple. They look at the bottom line. If you can release a product that is unfinished and reap very similar profits than holding off for a couple more months to get the job done right, every business person out there will push the product out early.

When you have review after review praising a game while brushing over the severe bugs or mentioning in passing I see a major problem there. What I would love is to have someone step up to the plate and flatly score a product. If there are CTD and savegame flaws prevalent, that game should NOT receive over a 5/10. I don't care if its the best, most revolutionary gameplay ever created. If its reviewed on release, as purchased in the store or sent from a manufacturer, that's the game. No, "we've been told by UBI that a patch is in the works that will fix these minor issues". Just, "Sorry, this game failed to meet a minimum criteria of acceptability".

Maybe I'm asking too much, but maybe, just maybe, we've all been slowly brainwashed into thinking this current "norm" is acceptable.

[7Enigma]

Well, like the man said, if you think that this game is problematic, you were not around for SH2.
Remember two years ago, when some were saying "SH3 is a total POS, just like SH2!"? Now they're using SH3 as a benchmark to criticize SH4.

That could be more telling then it sounds at first glance....:o

[John Channing]

The reason why they continue to release games prior to being finished is because all to often they are met with great reviews with a small * mention of bugs.

Wrong - The reasons are based on agreements, budget and deadlines made and set at the beginning of development.

And I would be willing to bet you if they received the proper bad press for releasing such an unfinished product, and thus also receiving poor sales figures, this trend would change. Gamers buy games based on 4 main factors:

1. The media blitz gets their attention and they buy based on hype

2. Review sites that say yay/nay

3. Friends/family/peers

4. Demo's or pirated versions

Businesses like money, plain and simple. They look at the bottom line. If you can release a product that is unfinished and reap very similar profits than holding off for a couple more months to get the job done right, every business person out there will push the product out early.

When you have review after review praising a game while brushing over the severe bugs or mentioning in passing I see a major problem there. What I would love is to have someone step up to the plate and flatly score a product. If there are CTD and savegame flaws prevalent, that game should NOT receive over a 5/10. I don't care if its the best, most revolutionary gameplay ever created. If its reviewed on release, as purchased in the store or sent from a manufacturer, that's the game. No, "we've been told by UBI that a patch is in the works that will fix these minor issues". Just, "Sorry, this game failed to meet a minimum criteria of acceptability".

Maybe I'm asking too much, but maybe, just maybe, we've all been slowly brainwashed into thinking this current "norm" is acceptable.

In the abstract what you say is correct, but how do you deal with the following real world scenario.

- Business Affairs meets with the Developers and agrees upon a release date.

- Marketing books ads in Trade magazines, reserves shelf space in stores worldwide, schedules interviews, create ad copy, schedules previews with major sites and publications and generally does their job. All of this is cancellable, but some will incur financial penalties.

- Distribution books production time with several DVD Replication Shops worldwide to assure prodct is available. Cancellable, but with financial penalties.

- Maunfacturing books time to create, manufacture and ship DVD cases, with jackets, to DVD houses to conicide with the finish of the burn process. Cancellable, but with financial penalties.

- Shipping companies are contracted to get the product to retailers. Cancellable, but with financial penalties.

- Printers are booked to produce manuals and game inserts and arrangements are made to have them shipped to the fulfillment houses at the same time the DVDs and other packaging arrives. Cancellable, but with financial penalties.

- release dates are sent out to on-line store who begin taking pre-orders based on the ship date Marketing has provided.

And then

- The developers discover that there is no way in hell that the product can be ready in time for the release date that was agreed to about a year ago.

If you cancel the entire chain of events, aside from the financial penalties that you would incur, you have to re-set the chain, which means you have to pull resources off other, probably more profitable projects. As well you are going to have a lot of negative press about your inability to hit your ship dates (SH3 and the Dynamic Campaign delay anyone?).

As to the financial penalties, you have not budgeted for them, so that cost has to come from somewhere. Where? You can't say "from increased sales of a better project" becuase if you go to any Project Manager anywhere with that statement you will be laughed out of the room, and rightfully so. You don't make financial projections based on "Gee Whiz, guys... it'll be great!".

Again, in the abstract it would be great if deadlines for a bug free product could be predicted a year in advance so that none of this would happen, but in reality thats not the way the world works.

JCC

[Tobus]

And I would be willing to bet you if they received the proper bad press for releasing such an unfinished product, and thus also receiving poor sales figures, this trend would change. Gamers buy games based on 4 main factors:

1. The media blitz gets their attention and they buy based on hype

2. Review sites that say yay/nay

3. Friends/family/peers

4. Demo's or pirated versions



Well, most reviews I have seen are rating top-notch for SH4. Only Yougamer has rated mediocre (65%) because of all the bugs, stating the the game is just not finished. It makes you wonder why other reviewers write such startlingly praising reviews. Is this because they don't understand their jobs? Or is it that most of their sites and mags are sponsored bigtime (via commercials and sneak-previews) by the same publishers of the games they review?

Otherwise, we have all bought the game, wether it is finished or not. Knowing that, it probably doesn't matter to UBI, since sales figures are there, good game or broken game. The only difference then is timing: making the budgetyear and expanding revenue. We gamers feel cheated, but UBI won't feel that in its cash-register.

[Grunt]

I m a big fan of SH3 and was tempted to buy SHIV of course but read a lot here on the game. Honnestly, you re scary people ;)
It s impossible for me to buy the game right now with all you said.
So what s the logic thing to do?
Search for a demo of course! So I can see if it s that bad...
Here is the issue... I can t find any demo?!?!?!? Is UBI so worry about the quality of the software to avoid publishing a demo and just hopping some people will buy the game without testing it first?

This is exactly why I post what I do. I would highly suggest you do not purchase SH4 til its in a playable state...if thats possible.

Whatever fun SH4 offers is drown in a sea of bugs, poor design, and just plan frustration.

Youll have fun playing for about 20 minutes, then your be enraged as you understand you just got snookered.

[tycho102]

In the abstract what you say is correct, but how do you deal with the following real world scenario.

- Business Affairs meets with the Developers and agrees upon a release date.

- Marketing books ads in Trade magazines, reserves shelf space in stores worldwide, schedules interviews, create ad copy, schedules previews with major sites and publications and generally does their job. All of this is cancellable, but some will incur financial penalties.

- release dates are sent out to on-line store who begin taking pre-orders based on the ship date Marketing has provided.


I would take off and nuke the entire marketing division from orbit. Twice.
It's the only way to be sure.




/they're all a bunch of lushes, anyway

[John Channing]

And I would be willing to bet you if they received the proper bad press for releasing such an unfinished product, and thus also receiving poor sales figures, this trend would change. Gamers buy games based on 4 main factors:

1. The media blitz gets their attention and they buy based on hype

2. Review sites that say yay/nay

3. Friends/family/peers

4. Demo's or pirated versions



Well, most reviews I have seen are rating top-notch for SH4. Only Yougamer has rated mediocre (65%) because of all the bugs, stating the the game is just not finished. It makes you wonder why other reviewers write such startlingly praising reviews. Is this because they don't understand their jobs? Or is it that most of their sites and mags are sponsored bigtime (via commercials and sneak-previews) by the same publishers of the games they review?



It's not always a conspiracy, you know. Different people look for different things in their examinations of a product. Even the release version looked fantastic on my system, so if a reviewer weighted graphics heavilly they would naturally give it a higher review.

The "A" crash was not introduced until 1.1, so, if they reviewed it out of the box, that would not be an issue.

The "torpedo drag" problem could have easily been missed due to an unfamiliarity with the manual targeting process (not unlike what actually happened in the early months of 1941).

In the case of this review there were a number of errors that highlighted the fact that the reviewer was not overly familiar with the mechanics of the game... but he included them anyway. I don't hear anyone crying that the review was rushed out!

A great many of the 'bugs" that people reported (and continue to report) are turning out to be siutations where they think SH4 acts the same as SH3... which is clearly not the case (the repeating objective "bug" for instance).

Another sizeable amount of "bugs" is turning out to be as a result of people friggin' with the .exe, or using illegally downloaded versions. Not really the developer's fault is it?

But, as I've said a million times, I am not saying the game was released in a finished state, or that there isn't more work to be done. Far from it. But if people are going to take the responsibiliuyt to review a product, they should take that responsibility seriously enough to actually spend the amount of time with it that it requires to get really familiar with it, before passing judgement.

JCC

[John Channing]

/they're all a bunch of lushes, anyway

And they speak so highly of you...

[7Enigma]

In the abstract what you say is correct, but how do you deal with the following real world scenario.

1 Business Affairs meets with the Developers and agrees upon a release date.

2 Marketing books ads in Trade magazines, reserves shelf space in stores worldwide, schedules interviews, create ad copy, schedules previews with major sites and publications and generally does their job. All of this is cancellable, but some will incur financial penalties.

3 Distribution books production time with several DVD Replication Shops worldwide to assure prodct is available. Cancellable, but with financial penalties.

4 Maunfacturing books time to create, manufacture and ship DVD cases, with jackets, to DVD houses to conicide with the finish of the burn process. Cancellable, but with financial penalties.

5 Shipping companies are contracted to get the product to retailers. Cancellable, but with financial penalties.

6 Printers are booked to produce manuals and game inserts and arrangements are made to have them shipped to the fulfillment houses at the same time the DVDs and other packaging arrives. Cancellable, but with financial penalties.

7 release dates are sent out to on-line store who begin taking pre-orders based on the ship date Marketing has provided.

And then

- The developers discover that there is no way in hell that the product can be ready in time for the release date that was agreed to about a year ago.

If you cancel the entire chain of events, aside from the financial penalties that you would incur, you have to re-set the chain, which means you have to pull resources off other, probably more profitable projects. As well you are going to have a lot of negative press about your inability to hit your ship dates (SH3 and the Dynamic Campaign delay anyone?).

As to the financial penalties, you have not budgeted for them, so that cost has to come from somewhere. Where? You can't say "from increased sales of a better project" becuase if you go to any Project Manager anywhere with that statement you will be laughed out of the room, and rightfully so. You don't make financial projections based on "Gee Whiz, guys... it'll be great!".

Again, in the abstract it would be great if deadlines for a bug free product could be predicted a year in advance so that none of this would happen, but in reality thats not the way the world works.

JCC

I changed your dashes to numbers for easier replying:

1. Rather then a fixed date (which IMO is almost 100% of the time missed) a date RANGE should be implemented (ie Q1, or first 1/2 of the year). Gives more flexibility to the project while still pinning down a BY NOW date. If 6 months prior to release its clear there is no chance for an acceptable product to be released, push it back, not a month, not a week, 3 months. If only Blizzard and Stardock were the norm...I know I know they're only mildly popular small companies with a small following of gamers, and barely making a profit. ;)

2. A month or two delay should not greatly impact this point. Just look at how far in advance we've been seeing the previews for Spiderman 3.

3. This one you're going to have to eat. There's no easy explaination for it (unless you have a supplimental disk/CD added later to apply a patch (I've seen this before but it was a long time ago). Clearly in that case the "GOLD" copy was made and then they further fixed some problems and put it on a 3.5" floppy (I think it was a chopper sim...Commanche?) I gained a LOT of respect for this company at the time.

4. Store em'. Simple, relatively cheap, and effective. I really can't imagine a warehouse is all that expensive in the grand scheme of things.

5. I don't see how this is much of a factor. Contact FedEx and say its coming next month.

6. Store em' with #4.

7. If I had a nickel for every time a game's release date changed I would be FAR richer and more sane then I am today (worked for 5 years at an EB store). I very might well still be on the pre-order for Team Fortress 2......Plus trust me, online retailers will not feel bad about taking your money ahead of time even if it gets pushed back and some pull their money. Most just curse and say when's it coming out now (HL1 and 2, Diablo1 and 2, Falcon 4.0, Warcraft (any of them), I could go on all day with how many times I had to look up the current "release" date)

Bottom line is those are all valid points you made, but compromise past a certain point is not acceptable. Releasing SH4 without AA support was a bummer, but had no impact on the game itself. Adding that as a feature (rather then calling it a patch) after release I can find somewhat acceptable. There's your anti-piracy move. Initial cracked release goes out without AA followed by an update threw UBI's servers that gives AA access. Yes it will be cracked as well and on the net by morning but its a better implementation then trying to program your game to recognize a pirated version and screw up legit copies (see any game released with Starforce and some Securom titles). I've heard enough issues with members on this board with supposed legit copies getting some of the glitches that are copy protections. :arrgh!: <-----Those guys laugh at that. And that just infuriates me even more when you can guarantee programmers were taken off the job at hand to implement these failed attempts at preventing pirating. :x

Now, when you release a game that has rampant OBVIOUS glitches from the first day of play, I call foul. And I keep hearing how not everyone is having problems, game works perfect for them, etc. So for all of those singing the praises, here's my smoking gun:

-Load up a new campaign and steam right into a convoy of ships. Launch a couple of torps at a ship or two for good measure. Make sure at least one is sunk or damaged. Save your game. Reload your game. :damn: Point made.

[John Channing]

-Load up a new campaign and steam right into a convoy of ships. Launch a couple of torps at a ship or two for good measure. Make sure at least one is sunk or damaged. Save your game. Reload your game. :damn: Point made.

I did exactly that last night. I had come across a Task Force who were riding out a storm in the Celebs Sea. I set up on a light Cruiser, put three torps into her and sent her to the bottom. Dinner bell rang so off to eat I go, having saved the mission. I re-started a couple of hours later and proceeded to send a Destroyer full of digital Japanese sailors off to meet their digital ancestors.

What did I miss?

JCC

[7Enigma]

-Load up a new campaign and steam right into a convoy of ships. Launch a couple of torps at a ship or two for good measure. Make sure at least one is sunk or damaged. Save your game. Reload your game. :damn: Point made.

I did exactly that last night. I had come across a Task Force who were riding out a storm in the Celebs Sea. I set up on a light Cruiser, put three torps into her and sent her to the bottom. Dinner bell rang so off to eat I go, having saved the mission. I re-started a couple of hours later and proceeded to send a Destroyer full of digital Japanese sailors off to meet their digital ancestors.

What did I miss?

JCC

The part where the light Cruiser is still there, the whole convoy has disappeared or moved to a different location, your crew is suddenly wounded, ect. I now follow the "7-step" guide to getting a savegame to reload exactly how it was left:

1. No ships nearby.

2. Not close to a crew change.

3. Not submerged.

4. Not moving.

5. On the map screen.

6. Holding my breath.

7. Praying?

OK those last 2 were my own additions but you get the idea. This is a holdover from SH3 with load issues and I've seen quite a few dandy one's myself. I'm happy for you that your reload worked fine.

[NEON DEON]

The only problem I have seen with saves is if I reload while in the middle of the game.

If I save and quit to main menu or exit and come back and reload the saved game I have no problems.

[John Channing]

The only problem I have seen with saves is if I reload while in the middle of the game.

If I save and quit to main menu or exit and come back and reload the saved game I have no problems.

Now that I think of it that's what I do too, and I have never had a problem. Well that is other than my speed is always re-set to 0 and it's a crap shoot whether I am still in Silent running or not, but both of those are easily taken care of.

Another time I had a Carrier dead in the water and was setting up to finish her off when I had to go... so saved & exit to Windows. Come back a couple of hours later, re-start and there she is,,, awaiting her demise just like I left her. 1 Torp and she almost rolled over on top of me.

It was beautiful to behold.

Plus I save a lot, but always under the same file name (Patrol 1, Patrol 2... you get the idea)

JCC

[dean_acheson]

I just over-write where I am at with the name of my sub.... (unless it is something really neat goign to happen, then I have been known to save it for possible replay later on)....

It makes it easier to have a couple different campaigns going on.
1 S Class out of Brisbane.

2. Gar out of Pearl.

3. Balao out of Pearl.

D#mn, I love this game. Even if I still ain't too good with the TDC.

[SteamWake]

I use (in addittion to the autosaves) three saves. I call it the rolling saves.

X1, X2, and X3 and alternate between those three progressively.

If X1 is at the top of the three and X2 is at the bottom Ill overwirte X2.

That way if one is corrupted I can roll back to the previous one.

(Please no X1 rants its just a random name.) :rock: