View Full Version : SH4 - post 1.2 status: A Plan of Action
Folks,
The game is broken in a significant way. We know this, the devs know this, UBI knows this. It's not a question or a subject for debate. It's a fact.
The question is, what will be done about it?
Obviously, the most satisfactory solution would be for UBI to issue a patch that fixes all of the critical defects (eg, crash bugs, unimplemented or non-functional features advertised as part of, or obviously essential to game play) and addresses as many of the non-critical defects (eg, aesthetics, typos, or other features not essential to game play) as can reasonably be expected.
Please note however, that this is not the same as asking for patch 1.3. I'm concerned by the "word" coming out of UBI, and those associated with them, regarding their apparent consideration for a 1.3 patch. I think we all understand that it's not the patch itself we want, but a fix for the bugs. I would not put it past UBI to issue a patch 1.3 - because "we asked for it" - and then say to us that we got what we asked for when we complain that it does not fix all of the critical defects.
Vague and tenuous, and even a bit cynical to be sure... but historically, such has been the relationship between game makers and game players. And while the results have been satisfactory in the majority of cases over the years (I've been playing computer games since 1981), there is the occasional EF2000 or Great Naval Battles: North Atlantic - games that were either never fixed, or for which the fix was sold to us as part of an "expansion" pack.
Now, if UBI decides not to support SH4 beyond the 1.2 patch, I think we'd all agree... as would most reasonable people once made aware of the situation... there is good reason to complain. But based on what I've read here and on the SH4 web site forums the last few weeks, I believe we're mostly clueless as to how to put forward our complaints in an effective manner.
The choices as I see them are as follows:
1. Shake our fists and stamp our feet and declare UBI evil incarnate to any and all who will listen.
2. Hire a lawyer and attempt to resolve the issue through litigation.
3. Threaten boycott, or
4. Utilize consumer protection resources provided to us free of charge by most states in the US and, I would bet, many goverments in Europe and Asia as well.
I don't have much faith that options 1, 2 or 3 will get us very far. However, option 4 has been effective for me in the past, and I believe it should be effective here as well. Therefore I propose the following plan of action:
First, write a letter of complaint to UBI, documenting the defects in SH4 and requesting either a fix or a refund.
Second, should UBI fail to respond to our satisfaction, file a complaint with the local govenment Consumer Protection Agency.
For folks in the US, UBI has offices in California, and regardless which state you're from or where you made your purchase, that puts the transaction under the jurisdiction of the California State Attorney General. The following links to a form letter that can be used for the initial complaint to UBI.
http://www.dca.ca.gov/r_r/complain.htm
This particular letter is no better or worse than others I've seen, or anything I could come up with myself, but I would recommend that we all use the same letter format, the exact same list of defects, and make the same exact request for remediation (fix or refund). In this way there will be no doubt in their minds that they are dealing with an organized effort, making it harder to ignore or dismiss.
In order to better target our complaints, I've identified the following corporate officers within UBI:
YVES GUILLEMOT
President and CEO
ALAIN CORRE
Executive Director, EMEA Territories
LAURENT DETOC
Executive Director, North America
My suggestion would be to address the complaint to the CEO as well as the appropriate territory director. As you might expect, these individuals insulate themselves from direct contact with the consumer fairly well... there is no actual contact info posted on their web sites. I did however find contact info, including email addresses, for the following media relations and corporate communications folks:
Christophe Grandjean
Corporate Media Relations Coordinator
christophe.grandjean@ubisoft.com
Jaime Borasi
Senior Manager
Corporate Communications
jaime.borasi@ubisoft.com
My suggestion is to email the linked form letter to thse individuals, along with attachments (if necessary) documenting the defects in SH4, and request that they forward the email to the CEO and territory director. Names and email addresses... enough to hold them accountable, and suitably placed to forward the complaint to the actual addressees.
Not that I expect a satisfactory response. But that's where the "hold accountable" part comes in. After the two week grace period referenced in the 1st complaint letter (linked above), the next step is to fill out the on-line complaint form at the California AG web site, here:
https://app.dca.ca.gov/cru/gencomplaint.asp
Note that this form requires that you provide information regarding who at UBI you contacted about this issue. Our answer will be "the CEO", et al.
As to the complaint itself... just a repeat of what was included in the UBI letter. I would highly suggest that this be kept brief - perhaps a numerical count of defects by category (x number of critical defects, y number of non-critical) with maybe the top 3 or 4, such as those Neal spelled out in his petition thread, specifically referenced. A note that we would be willing to provide a complete list of defects on request would probably be a good idea as well.
And regarding the expected resolution... the only reasonable thing we can ask for here is a fix or a refund.
Now all the above links and suggestions are related to US purchasers. I live in the US, so you'll have to forgive me if this whole thing comes off a bit US-centric. I'm sure, however, that there are some enterprising folks out there who can dig up the same type of info and contacts for your parts of the world.
And even for folks in the US, you might also try poking around your State AG's web site to see if they have a similar vehicle for complaint. If so, there is no reason not to file the complaint in your state as well as in California. I do feel it's important to include California though, as that's the one common denominator among us and the place where the weight of our numbers will be most evident.
Anyway, that's my $0.02 on the matter....
JD
CaptainHaplo
05-19-07, 05:20 PM
I am no seer - I normally dont predict the future - but I forsee a big red X listed next to this thread soon.
No offense mate - but before suggesting filing complaints and such - just email ubisoft and let them make a decision....
IF they say no - then each consumer will have a choice to make - but I will say it again - Subsim.com is not the place for that discussion....
Nor is it time to start talking complaints, legal action or anything else when no decision has been made yet.
Now is not the time - here is not the place....
(Hopes while clicking submit I beat the red X)
terrapin
05-19-07, 05:23 PM
Folks,
The game is broken in a significant way. We know this, the devs know this, UBI knows this. It's not a question or a subject for debate. It's a fact.
The question is, what will be done about it?
Obviously, the most satisfactory solution would be for UBI to issue a patch that fixes all of the critical defects (eg, crash bugs, unimplemented or non-functional features advertised as part of, or obviously essential to game play) and addresses as many of the non-critical defects (eg, aesthetics, typos, or other features not essential to game play) as can reasonably be expected.
Please note however, that this is not the same as asking for patch 1.3. I'm concerned by the "word" coming out of UBI, and those associated with them, regarding their apparent consideration for a 1.3 patch. I think we all understand that it's not the patch itself we want, but a fix for the bugs. I would not put it past UBI to issue a patch 1.3 - because "we asked for it" - and then say to us that we got what we asked for when we complain that it does not fix all of the critical defects.
Vague and tenuous, and even a bit cynical to be sure... but historically, such has been the relationship between game makers and game players. And while the results have been satisfactory in the majority of cases over the years (I've been playing computer games since 1981), there is the occasional EF2000 or Great Naval Battles: North Atlantic - games that were either never fixed, or for which the fix was sold to us as part of an "expansion" pack.
Now, if UBI decides not to support SH4 beyond the 1.2 patch, I think we'd all agree... as would most reasonable people once made aware of the situation... there is good reason to complain. But based on what I've read here and on the SH4 web site forums the last few weeks, I believe we're mostly clueless as to how to put forward our complaints in an effective manner.
The choices as I see them are as follows:
1. Shake our fists and stamp our feet and declare UBI evil incarnate to any and all who will listen.
2. Hire a lawyer and attempt to resolve the issue through litigation.
3. Threaten boycott, or
4. Utilize consumer protection resources provided to us free of charge by most states in the US and, I would bet, many goverments in Europe and Asia as well.
I don't have much faith that options 1, 2 or 3 will get us very far. However, option 4 has been effective for me in the past, and I believe it should be effective here as well. Therefore I propose the following plan of action:
First, write a letter of complaint to UBI, documenting the defects in SH4 and requesting either a fix or a refund.
Second, should UBI fail to respond to our satisfaction, file a complaint with the local govenment Consumer Protection Agency.
For folks in the US, UBI has offices in California, and regardless which state you're from or where you made your purchase, that puts the transaction under the jurisdiction of the California State Attorney General. The following links to a form letter that can be used for the initial complaint to UBI.
http://www.dca.ca.gov/r_r/complain.htm
This particular letter is no better or worse than others I've seen, or anything I could come up with myself, but I would recommend that we all use the same letter format, the exact same list of defects, and make the same exact request for remediation (fix or refund). In this way there will be no doubt in their minds that they are dealing with an organized effort, making it harder to ignore or dismiss.
In order to better target our complaints, I've identified the following corporate officers within UBI:
YVES GUILLEMOT
President and CEO
ALAIN CORRE
Executive Director, EMEA Territories
LAURENT DETOC
Executive Director, North America
My suggestion would be to address the complaint to the CEO as well as the appropriate territory director. As you might expect, these individuals insulate themselves from direct contact with the consumer fairly well... there is no actual contact info posted on their web sites. I did however find contact info, including email addresses, for the following media relations and corporate communications folks:
Christophe Grandjean
Corporate Media Relations Coordinator
christophe.grandjean@ubisoft.com
Jaime Borasi
Senior Manager
Corporate Communications
jaime.borasi@ubisoft.com
My suggestion is to email the linked form letter to thse individuals, along with attachments (if necessary) documenting the defects in SH4, and request that they forward the email to the CEO and territory director. Names and email addresses... enough to hold them accountable, and suitably placed to forward the complaint to the actual addressees.
Not that I expect a satisfactory response. But that's where the "hold accountable" part comes in. After the two week grace period referenced in the 1st complaint letter (linked above), the next step is to fill out the on-line complaint form at the California AG web site, here:
https://app.dca.ca.gov/cru/gencomplaint.asp
Note that this form requires that you provide information regarding who at UBI you contacted about this issue. Our answer will be "the CEO", et al.
As to the complaint itself... just a repeat of what was included in the UBI letter. I would highly suggest that this be kept brief - perhaps a numerical count of defects by category (x number of critical defects, y number of non-critical) with maybe the top 3 or 4, such as those Neal spelled out in his petition thread, specifically referenced. A note that we would be willing to provide a complete list of defects on request would probably be a good idea as well.
And regarding the expected resolution... the only reasonable thing we can ask for here is a fix or a refund.
Now all the above links and suggestions are related to US purchasers. I live in the US, so you'll have to forgive me if this whole thing comes off a bit US-centric. I'm sure, however, that there are some enterprising folks out there who can dig up the same type of info and contacts for your parts of the world.
And even for folks in the US, you might also try poking around your State AG's web site to see if they have a similar vehicle for complaint. If so, there is no reason not to file the complaint in your state as well as in California. I do feel it's important to include California though, as that's the one common denominator among us and the place where the weight of our numbers will be most evident.
Anyway, that's my $0.02 on the matter....
JD
Good suggestions! Thanks. I've re-published them on the FP of my site.
AVGWarhawk
05-19-07, 05:33 PM
I am no seer - I normally dont predict the future - but I forsee a big red X listed next to this thread soon.
No offense mate - but before suggesting filing complaints and such - just email ubisoft and let them make a decision....
IF they say no - then each consumer will have a choice to make - but I will say it again - Subsim.com is not the place for that discussion....
Nor is it time to start talking complaints, legal action or anything else when no decision has been made yet.
Now is not the time - here is not the place....
(Hopes while clicking submit I beat the red X)
No big red X here Sir! Looks like a good plan of action to me. This is were the energies need to be going.
I plan on sending the form. Whats to lose? A few minutes of my time. Nothing more.
AVGWarhawk
05-19-07, 05:40 PM
Personal emails sent to both. Both emails were respectful and with logic. I recommend you do the same for any action to be granted. Both emails signed with my full name. Let see what happens.
IF they say no - then each consumer will have a choice to make - but I will say it again - Subsim.com is not the place for that discussion....
That is totally illogical. If not here, where? This seems like the only logical place for the sub sim community to come together to accomplish this:
This particular letter is no better or worse than others I've seen, or anything I could come up with myself, but I would recommend that we all use the same letter format, the exact same list of defects, and make the same exact request for remediation (fix or refund). In this way there will be no doubt in their minds that they are dealing with an organized effort, making it harder to ignore or dismiss.
Edit: I just read the post where you explained your position. I agree with you in that context, that this isnt the place to pitch a fit. However I still disagree that this isn't the place to discuss what we should do about Ubisoft's decision (if indeed they decide against 1.3).
CaptainHaplo
05-19-07, 07:00 PM
Well - its not the first time I have been wrong! :lol:
I have no problem sending email to Ubi (Mine have been gone a while back - but these two might be good contacts as well.) - my issue is the idea of filing complaints with various agencies is a bit premature.
Its all good.
Bane - as for discussions of legal action, boycotts, etc - I posted on this issue earlier, see http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=114943 for why such topics are likely to continued to be shut down. While I agree that if Ubi says no a discussion will be needed - but Subsim has garnered respect because its not a "off the deep end flame and threat" community.
Jungman
05-19-07, 07:17 PM
I think simply another route. Give us the tools by Ubisoft from the devs to change the hardcoded data and such. Is that what a SDK is?:p
Let us fans with computer skill do the work. Labor of love for the game. It really is the best way than a lawsuit.
*yawn*
Another laughably naive, pointless, boring thread.......
:down:
*yawn*
Another laughably naive, pointless, boring thread.......
:down:
Those two games I mentioned.... with the help of the Connecticut State AG in one case and the Washington State AG in the other, I received refunds from the publishers (Ocean and SSI) for both.
It works.
U-Bones
05-20-07, 12:00 AM
*yawn*
Another laughably naive, pointless, boring thread.......
:down:
Those two games I mentioned.... with the help of the Connecticut State AG in one case and the Washington State AG in the other, I received refunds from the publishers (Ocean and SSI) for both.
It works.
Thing is, some of us want a working sub game WAY more than a refund... Know a way to get both ? I don't.
Camaero
05-20-07, 01:53 AM
Good thread. The more our voices are heard, the more there will be a chance for action.
*yawn*
Another laughably naive, pointless, boring thread.......
:down:
Those two games I mentioned.... with the help of the Connecticut State AG in one case and the Washington State AG in the other, I received refunds from the publishers (Ocean and SSI) for both.
It works.
Both of which were pretty damn good and do not exist anymore.
Ocean: TFX, EF-2000, Tactcom, etc
SSI: Oh, where to start? SHI, Harpoon, Great Naval Battles, Su-27 Flanker, Panzer General, etc. etc.
It works, indeed. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
Duke_Wellington_1st
05-20-07, 04:51 AM
Great Thread.
I do not uderstand those voices that seem to support companies that sell faulty and unfinished products. Sure the Sub simulation genre is fairly bare.... but no reason to support publishers that rush release dates and fail to deliver what they advertise. That sort of behaviour should not be tolerated in any industry.
Great Thread.
I do not uderstand those voices that seem to support companies that sell faulty and unfinished products. Sure the Sub simulation genre is fairly bare.... but no reason to support publishers that rush release dates and fail to deliver what they advertise. That sort of behaviour should not be tolerated in any industry.
Look, the thing is, how do you know they "rushed" the release date? Do you think they contracted the dev team without a time shedule set out beforehand and then all of a sudden one day broke through the door saying "All right, everyone STOP! We are going to publish now."? Publishing a software product on a worldwide scale, with buying shelf space in advance etc. is not something you do over a weekend. And sure enough when the publisher asks "So, when will it be done? We would like to see it on shelves in a year." the notion the devs could just answer back "It'll be done when it's done." is laughable. You won't find any publisher by doing so. This is what modders can do when there is no money involved, but not when you are in business.
So you gota make contracts and set priorities in developement to ensure you STICK to what you SIGNED and be able to deliver a working product on release date. Features described in the manual but totally absent in the product (like properly working radar, chronometer, map notes, and may I say convoys NOT stopping waiting to be torpedoed is also essential for a subsim and shouldn't even need to be mentioned, and bugs that weren't there in SHIII) is NOT acceptable and surely NOT the fault of the publisher. The devs build the game, not the publisher. And now, the publisher has already allowed for two more patches. The devs had two more patches to fix things, but were unable to complete it.
Of course Ubisoft gets the blame and rage of the customer for that - which is proper from the customer's perspective, since the publisher is his direct other contracting party - but the only thing the publisher will do when being "dropped" by the customer is drop HIS contracting party, the dev team. And it doesn't matter whether that's an in-house or external team.
So, all this "BOYCOTT / SUE UBI!" is not only half of the story, but if you think the devs are not to blame for any of that and want to see them stay in business it won't be helpfull to that cause at all.
BTW, just to clarify: My intend is not to harrass the devs. I'm pretty happy that there is a SHIV and even in its current state I'm enjoying it a lot and it's far from unplayable, like some people here portray it. What I'm saying is that if people want to hit Ubisoft, they will most probably hit the devs instead, regardless how often they state "It's Ubisoft, not the devs." Those are romantic words on the internet as opposed to contracts and money in the real world.
castorp345
05-20-07, 07:44 AM
all this "BOYCOTT / SUE UBI!" is not only half of the story, but if you think the devs are not to blame for any of that and want to see them stay in business it won't be helpfull to that cause at all.
good post, heartc... thanks for the perspective!
:up:
i wonder though what you might suggest as recourse in the event of 1.3 never surfacing?
simply grin and bear it? it is afterall just a game, but it'd sure be nice to see it reach it's potential...
:hmm:
First, write a letter of complaint to UBI, documenting the defects in SH4 and requesting either a fix or a refund.
Second, should UBI fail to respond to our satisfaction, file a complaint with the local govenment Consumer Protection Agency.
For folks in the US, UBI has offices in California, and regardless which state you're from or where you made your purchase, that puts the transaction under the jurisdiction of the California State Attorney General. The following links to a form letter that can be used for the initial complaint to UBI.
http://www.dca.ca.gov/r_r/complain.htm
This particular letter is no better or worse than others I've seen, or anything I could come up with myself, but I would recommend that we all use the same letter format, the exact same list of defects, and make the same exact request for remediation (fix or refund). In this way there will be no doubt in their minds that they are dealing with an organized effort, making it harder to ignore or dismiss.
In order to better target our complaints, I've identified the following corporate officers within UBI:
YVES GUILLEMOT
President and CEO
ALAIN CORRE
Executive Director, EMEA Territories
LAURENT DETOC
Executive Director, North America
My suggestion would be to address the complaint to the CEO as well as the appropriate territory director. As you might expect, these individuals insulate themselves from direct contact with the consumer fairly well... there is no actual contact info posted on their web sites. I did however find contact info, including email addresses, for the following media relations and corporate communications folks:
Christophe Grandjean
Corporate Media Relations Coordinator
christophe.grandjean@ubisoft.com
Jaime Borasi
Senior Manager
Corporate Communications
jaime.borasi@ubisoft.com
My suggestion is to email the linked form letter to thse individuals, along with attachments (if necessary) documenting the defects in SH4, and request that they forward the email to the CEO and territory director. Names and email addresses... enough to hold them accountable, and suitably placed to forward the complaint to the actual addressees.
Not that I expect a satisfactory response. But that's where the "hold accountable" part comes in. After the two week grace period referenced in the 1st complaint letter (linked above), the next step is to fill out the on-line complaint form at the California AG web site, here:
https://app.dca.ca.gov/cru/gencomplaint.asp
Note that this form requires that you provide information regarding who at UBI you contacted about this issue. Our answer will be "the CEO", et al.
As to the complaint itself... just a repeat of what was included in the UBI letter. I would highly suggest that this be kept brief - perhaps a numerical count of defects by category (x number of critical defects, y number of non-critical) with maybe the top 3 or 4, such as those Neal spelled out in his petition thread, specifically referenced. A note that we would be willing to provide a complete list of defects on request would probably be a good idea as well.
And regarding the expected resolution... the only reasonable thing we can ask for here is a fix or a refund.
Now all the above links and suggestions are related to US purchasers. I live in the US, so you'll have to forgive me if this whole thing comes off a bit US-centric. I'm sure, however, that there are some enterprising folks out there who can dig up the same type of info and contacts for your parts of the world.
And even for folks in the US, you might also try poking around your State AG's web site to see if they have a similar vehicle for complaint. If so, there is no reason not to file the complaint in your state as well as in California. I do feel it's important to include California though, as that's the one common denominator among us and the place where the weight of our numbers will be most evident.
Anyway, that's my $0.02 on the matter....
JD
This sounds like the perfect solution to me. All I want is a fix or a refund and this seems like the best (most likely) way to get it.
So, all this "BOYCOTT / SUE UBI!" is not only half of the story, but if you think the devs are not to blame for any of that and want to see them stay in business it won't be helpfull to that cause at all.
Remember that Ubisoft is both the publisher and developer of SH4.
A company that releases a broken product and refuses to fix it doesn't deserve to stay in business. Customers should be actively trying to get such a company out of business because for every large company that serves its customers poorly there are always two or three companies overshadowed by such a company who want to serve the customer better, and they will hire devs who do good work (so Ubi devs won't go hungry) and hopefully they'll avoid publishers who serve the customer poorly.
castorp345
05-20-07, 08:11 AM
here's a copy of the email i'm sending via corporate communications:
***
Dear Mr. Yves Guillemot:
I want to inform you of my dissatisfaction with the Ubisoft software title Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific. I purchased this item as a pre-order on March 10th from the Ubisoft online store.
My complaint concerns the following issues that leave this product defective and broken:
Radar needs to be made functional.
All AI needs fixing. Too often merchant ships all come to a stop and muddle around when under attack. Destroyers guarding merchants and especially in task forces occasionally seem somewhat uninterested in firing back. The Subchaser is unable to fire its main gun at all. If you mod the Subchaser to have a second gun in a raised position where the AA gun is it will fire this gun. The Akizuki DD has a similar issue, of the four guns it has only the two guns on the raised platforms actually fire. When the boat is rammed by a destroyer (for example) the destroyer generally comes of worse and often explodes.
Units of measurement: Imperial units for ship dimensions, torpedo depth gauge, range figure in the TDC and Position Keeper, all UOM issues need to be resolved.
Repetitive patrols still get assigned.
Chronometer still doesn’t work as described in the manual. “The Chronometer bug”, this needs a quick and dirty fix, just a simple speed response in the text box when the Speed button is selected in the TDC, as occurs when the player clicks the Depth Beneath Keel button. But, importantly, the player should still have the choice of manually entering his own speed estimate in the TDC.To solve these issues, I would like either for a patch to be released that fixes them, or to receive a refund in full for this currently defective product.
I look forward to your reply and resolution of my complaint and will allow two weeks before referring it to the appropriate consumer agency.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
I think simply another route. Give us the tools by Ubisoft from the devs to change the hardcoded data and such. Is that what a SDK is?:p
Let us fans with computer skill do the work. Labor of love for the game. It really is the best way than a lawsuit.
That works too. However I doubt that Ubisoft will release the SDK if there's any potential at all for another Silent Hunter game.
AVGWarhawk
05-20-07, 09:13 AM
However I doubt that Ubisoft will release the SDK if there's any potential at all for another Silent Hunter game.
As far as SH4 was handled, I do not see potential for this series to go on. If they are simply refusing to fix this game or just ignoring it, the possibilities for more in the series looks very remote. A refund is fine but I would much rather have the game fixed. Probably cost a whole lot less also!
You guys far far FAR overestimate your (or should I say our since I am member of this "club" too) importance.
This game got solid reviews and for all I can say sold as much as SH3. Mr Yves Guillemot is probably too busy to ever read any of your mails, and if he does so, he'll see a spreadsheet with sales results of 100s of UbiSoft games (majority of which are for consoles anyway) conclude that SH4 is one smallllllllllliiiisssshhhhhhh micro-number on that list. Then he'll throw your mail(s) into recycle bin. (That's what I would do anyway.)
Perhaps he'll decide to spend next 5 minutes Googling the net to see SH4 reviews, and he'll actually find very nice reviews, averaging above 80%! Next, he'll conculde - rightfully IMO - that he's dealing with a bunch of wackos, who for some reason don't like 80+% game and again, throw the mail(s) into Recycle bin.
Get real people.
Besides, I like the game and think it's better than SH3 in all aspects :D
castorp345
05-20-07, 09:56 AM
You guys far far FAR overestimate your (or should I say our since I am member of this "club" too) importance.
...
he'll throw your mail(s) into recycle bin.
undoubtedly you're correct, but let's just say that for my piece of "wacko" consumer mind at least i'd like to know that i did everything that it's in my "overestimate[d]" power to do to get this thing to where it ought to have been upon initial release.
Besides, I like the game and think it's better than SH3 in all aspects
i agree, but that doesn't preclude the fact that it has several key flaws which arguably constitute it as being "broken"...
but who's to say that M. Guillemot doesn't take an interest in the products his comapny sells? i realize of course what a long-shot it is (especially being somewhat familiar with 'typical' French business mentality), but better to have made an effort and failed than never to have tried at all!
:88)
Next, he'll conculde - rightfully IMO - that he's dealing with a bunch of wackos, who for some reason don't like 80+% game and again, throw the mail(s) into Recycle bin.
As long as I get the game fixed or my refund I'll be happy. I really don't care if Yves Guillemot or you think I'm a wacko. Personally I reckon that anyone defending Ubisoft's decision to stop patching SH4 is a wacko, but that's just me.
You guys far far FAR overestimate your (or should I say our since I am member of this "club" too) importance. <snip>
I don't understand this attitude. So you're saying doing nothing is better than doing something. If that something turns out to be futile then so be it, but at least we tried to stand up for ourselves.
Your apathy and defeatist attitude is part of the problem. As long as people such as yourself believe there's nothing we can do about it nothing will be done about it and we'll continue to be fed these lackluster games. If you want to be a doormat, fine, but get out of the way of people that don't.
There is no sense in developers making simlulations for communities that are just going to demand refunds if they can't have everything they want.
I for one do NOT want a refund, because implicit in the "refund" approach is returning the product that is being refunded, and I do not care to part with my SH4, whatever it's state.
I will encourage continued support by promising future purchases if I am satisfied, not be reversing the purchase process through refund.
terrapin
05-20-07, 11:00 AM
Personally I reckon that anyone defending Ubisoft's decision to stop patching SH4 is a wacko, but that's just me.
:D You're not alone.
signed in advance, if this turns into a petition.
As long as I get the game fixed or my refund I'll be happy. I really don't care if Yves Guillemot or you think I'm a wacko. Personally I reckon that anyone defending Ubisoft's decision to stop patching SH4 is a wacko, but that's just me.
I am not defending their decision to stop patching anything (BTW you speak of this "decision" as if it's the historic fact :hmm: ).
I am merely observing that harassing highly positioned Ubisoft executives with emails and threatening with lawsuits will only make them laugh (if EVEN THAT is not overestimating the reaction these mails will produce).
Face it. SH4 got very very solid reviews (by me, as well - 87%). Why would people like Yves get concerned? Because handful of rivet counters think the radar in the game does not work 100% correct? Come on. Why should he care, in fact why should anyone outside "our" micro-small club care?
Hell most players don't care about patches and play the game on 0% realism. Someone, I think AVGWarhawk made a good anecdotal post about that.
"We" who care about the game make like 0,0001% of Ubisoft customers, we are not in a position to threat, hell we're not even in a position to beg. That's how small we are. The one thing we CAN do is stop making laughable posts on this board.
I realise that denial is part of the process of accepting that we've been screwed, but this is ridiculous.
As for us not being in a position to threaten, we buy the games. Plus we have certain heavy-duty rights as consumers. If we don't have the ultimate power who does?
CaptainCox
05-20-07, 11:35 AM
Wow!..how come they have taken a decision like that? money, time?
Not normal for a game of this caliber, to stop patching after 2 month of a release...is it. OK its not HALO bleeding 5 or something but SH is still a big franchise as a SIM compared to other SIM's.....or is it a marketing trick...I wonder...
Well if it comes to the worst we have to demand a SDK!
Wow!..how come they have taken a decision like that? money, time?
As I understand it from what I've read elsewhere the decision is being made based on the budget.
Hmmm... I thought this was a no brainer and everyone would understand where I was coming from. It was not my intent to create division in the ranks... for that I apologize.
I do tend to be a bit verbose at times, causing people to skim through the post and miss any valid points I might make... and that may be at the root of some of the arguments in this thread. Again, I apologize. But let me try to make good by making it simple.
I am not advocating a law suit. In fact I was a bit derisive in the way I presented that option.
I do not want a refund either. However, nothing is more effective in getting your point of view across than reaching into someone's pocket. More effective than witholding money (ie, refusing to purchase in the first place), more effective than the threat of future boycott, more effective than demanding justice in a forum such as this... and certainly more effective than doing nothing.
As to doing nothing until UBI makes their final decision on whether to do another patch?... IMHO, that's too late. See my comment above RE not wanting a refund. I want a fix. Failing to apply whatever leverage we may be able to generate while there's still time to affect the patch decision will not serve my purpose, at least.
Whether or not Mssr. Guillemot takes our complaints seriously is beside the point. I expect that he will not. What he may take seriously however is a request for a response to our complaints coming from the California State Attorney General. In fact I'm counting more on that than I am on convincing him with my initial complaint letter to see reason.
Regarding the actual vs the perceived state (vis-a-vis 80% reviews) of the product from an outsider's point of view...? Reviews (read, one man's opinion) mean virtually nothing... particularly when the company who made the product is advertising in that publication. The state of the product can best be determined by comparing promised or advertised features and functionality (eg, magazine and web site advertising and the game manual are two good sources) to actual features and functionality.
And if anyone is interested... the legal principle in play here (again, speaking only for the US) is called "implied warranty". Specifically, "merchantability" and "fitness for a particular purpose". Having had this conversation before with the CT state AG's office, I believe I am correct in stating that the former applies here. The question an AG will be interested in is whether or not the product released was actually ready and suitable for commercial sale.
And before anyone says it <g>... UBI can "disclaim" all they want, but many states in the US (including California and Connecticut) do not allow manufacturers to disclaim implied warranties... at least not in the way UBI attempts to do it in their EULA
To summarize: this is not about law suits or temper tantrums or playing at Don Quixote... this is about making use of a viable mechanism provided for the express purpose of protecting consumers from purveyors of defective product.
JD
This is an excellent initiative! I have just been through the same circus with Medieval II Total War and I regret that I didn't do something more proactive like this. As to the refund then I would suggest donating it to either charity or the open source sub sim project I read about somewhere ... even better, let's collect the refunds and use it to send the UBI staff on a free course in software quality assurance ... and history 101 if we have the funds :)
So, all this "BOYCOTT / SUE UBI!" is not only half of the story, but if you think the devs are not to blame for any of that and want to see them stay in business it won't be helpfull to that cause at all.
Remember that Ubisoft is both the publisher and developer of SH4.
A company that releases a broken product and refuses to fix it doesn't deserve to stay in business. Customers should be actively trying to get such a company out of business because for every large company that serves its customers poorly there are always two or three companies overshadowed by such a company who want to serve the customer better, and they will hire devs who do good work (so Ubi devs won't go hungry) and hopefully they'll avoid publishers who serve the customer poorly.
Well, all I can say is that I hope you're right in that. Fact is that the simulation market - or the simulation offerings - has taken a big hit and has become a niche market amongst all those FPS, console games, Online RPGs and moronic "Sims" computer games. In a way, I agree very much that you should not allow mediocre products being put on the market just because you are afraid to not get anything else. On the other hand, it might just be like that. I don't know. I just know that Microprose, SSI, Ocean, DiD, Digital Integration, Jane's, etc. are all gone already. There's not much left. All hail to anyone taking up the torch to run with it, but I don't see any indication for this happening anytime soon.
Fact is that the simulation market - or the simulation offerings - has taken a big hit and has become a niche market...
They've been proclaiming the imminent death of the sim market for ten years, but somehow sims keep getting made.
AVGWarhawk
05-20-07, 07:26 PM
To summarize: this is not about law suits or temper tantrums or playing at Don Quixote... this is about making use of a viable mechanism provided for the express purpose of protecting consumers from purveyors of defective product.
That is they way I read your original post. I made my email and sent it off.:up:
Fact is that the simulation market - or the simulation offerings - has taken a big hit and has become a niche market...
They've been proclaiming the imminent death of the sim market for ten years, but somehow sims keep getting made.
But not in the numbers, or the complexity, that they used to be. Look at the combat jet scene. The last jet sims (my other hobby) that I can think of with complex avionics was Falcon 4.0 and Jane's FA-18, and they are about 10 years old now. The very few jet sims have come out in the last 10 years have had arcade avionics (though LOMAC did have excellent flight models). As a result, I still fly 4.0 (Free Falcon build) and occasionally Jane's F-15 and FA-18. The graphics are dated, buit there is still nothing comparable on the market in the last 10 years.
When it comes to sub sims, all there is Sonalysts (who do this as a side diversion from real life work), and the SH franchise, which we are kicking in the teeth.
So no, combat sims aren't dead, but they are (IMO) a faint shadow of what they used to be in terms of numbers and detail.
Fact is that the simulation market - or the simulation offerings - has taken a big hit and has become a niche market...
They've been proclaiming the imminent death of the sim market for ten years, but somehow sims keep getting made.
But not in the numbers, or the complexity, that they used to be. Look at the combat jet scene. The last jet sims (my other hobby) that I can think of with complex avionics was Falcon 4.0 and Jane's FA-18, and they are about 10 years old now. The very few jet sims have come out in the last 10 years have had arcade avionics (though LOMAC did have excellent flight models). As a result, I still fly 4.0 (Free Falcon build) and occasionally Jane's F-15 and FA-18. The graphics are dated, buit there is still nothing comparable on the market in the last 10 years.
When it comes to sub sims, all there is Sonalysts (who do this as a side diversion from real life work), and the SH franchise, which we are kicking in the teeth.
So no, combat sims aren't dead, but they are (IMO) a faint shadow of what they used to be in terms of numbers and detail.
Okay, but that's hardly because the market for them really changed. What happened was that the industry changed - FPS games became the types of games that were best able to push the edge of the envelope in terms of graphics. It had nothing to do with the sim genre dying - it was just that manufacturers found engines that did FPS well and players wanted the most appealing graphics. Flight sims weren't where it was at anymore. Once flight sims get graphics that are as advanced as the FPS games, and once the current batch of mediocre flight sim developers are gone, the genre will be picked up by companies that can do what Dynamix and the Falcon crew did and the genre will rise again.
As long as I get the game fixed or my refund I'll be happy. I really don't care if Yves Guillemot or you think I'm a wacko. Personally I reckon that anyone defending Ubisoft's decision to stop patching SH4 is a wacko, but that's just me.
I am not defending their decision to stop patching anything (BTW you speak of this "decision" as if it's the historic fact :hmm: )...
It IS an historical fact. As I understand it the devs are putting their case to the suits to release another patch. As things stand the decision has been made to stop further patching. The decision can be reversed but the dev team have to plead for the reversal.
I realise that denial is part of the process of accepting that we've been screwed, but this is ridiculous.
As for us not being in a position to threaten, we buy the games. Plus we have certain heavy-duty rights as consumers. If we don't have the ultimate power who does?
Right I belong to the camp that wants another patch ... 100% but tell me how do you know this for a fact? Has there been an open, clear announcement that there won't be another patch?:down: If so point me to it please.
Ref: Future of sims
I like the future you predict. I hope it comes to be.
As for us not being in a position to threaten, we buy the games. Plus we have certain heavy-duty rights as consumers. If we don't have the ultimate power who does?
Yeh, you bought the game and it works. You can install it, start it and play it. So it works. That's pretty much the only thing Ubi has to care if they sell a game. There's no law to force them to patch the game. Some features are broken, yes, but if someone would sue Ubi over that or demand their money back, all they'd have to do is say "We meant it that way".
So, no we are not in the position to threaten them.
I'm addressing this to those who throughout this thread insist on misrepresenting or twisting my initial suggestions for constructive action. A shafting from UBI is one thing. The in fighting and antagonism here is quite another.
I'm honestly beginning to wonder whether we're dealing with UBI shills, a clique of fan-boy apologists, or just folks who have reading/comprehension issues.
It's frustrating.
My message is simple. If you don't like what's happening here, DO SOMETHING.
Preferably something constructive.
I offered a suggestion for constructive action above (first post in this thread). And again... I've actually done this before... it works. But if it doesn't work for you for some reason, find something that does. Most civilized countries have consumer protection mechanisms in place for just this type of thing.
Even if, in the strictest sense of the consumer law where you live, we don't have much of a case... and I'd have a hard time believing that for a second... just the act of filing the complaint and initiating an investigation or intervention by a govenment agency may have a positive effect.
And even if it's not really a refund you're after, do it for no other reason than to make UBI feel some of our pain. Go out and buy the game again afterward if you really want to. There are 2 dozen copies available on eBay as I type this.
Bottom line... if you've got a problem with UBI and their handling of this situation, and you DON'T take some positive action to help yourself - and I don't mean groveling for a patch, throwing temper tantrums or making boycot threats in a web forum- you deserve what you're going to get.... this time and from now on.
JD
Keelbuster
05-23-07, 12:14 PM
*yawn*
Another laughably naive, pointless, boring thread.......
:down:
Those two games I mentioned.... with the help of the Connecticut State AG in one case and the Washington State AG in the other, I received refunds from the publishers (Ocean and SSI) for both.
It works.
Both of which were pretty damn good and do not exist anymore.
Ocean: TFX, EF-2000, Tactcom, etc
SSI: Oh, where to start? SHI, Harpoon, Great Naval Battles, Su-27 Flanker, Panzer General, etc. etc.
It works, indeed. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
I sort of agree - i feel like Ubi deserves to be punished way more than a smaller firm that tries to produce quality and falls short. Game companies that shoot for quality seem so few that we need to preserve them, and on the other hand, we need to help kill their competition.
the_belgian
05-23-07, 12:33 PM
I think simply another route. Give us the tools by Ubisoft from the devs to change the hardcoded data and such. Is that what a SDK is?:p
Let us fans with computer skill do the work. Labor of love for the game. It really is the best way than a lawsuit.
Rowan did give the codes to the DEV-team in order to make Battle of Britain,Wings of Victory a growing sim. thanks to the BDG members(wich i'm proud to be a,small,member of)the sim is,after so many years,still up to date!!!
look at http://shockwaveproductions.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=10
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s99/yveswouters/FSPDEEP.jpg
Lt. Cobra
05-23-07, 11:42 PM
As for us not being in a position to threaten, we buy the games. Plus we have certain heavy-duty rights as consumers. If we don't have the ultimate power who does?
Yeh, you bought the game and it works. You can install it, start it and play it. So it works. That's pretty much the only thing Ubi has to care if they sell a game. There's no law to force them to patch the game. Some features are broken, yes, but if someone would sue Ubi over that or demand their money back, all they'd have to do is say "We meant it that way".
So, no we are not in the position to threaten them.Wrong! The game does not play or work for me. I have not been able to complete one mission to this day because of CTD.
I uninstalled SH4 leaving no folders to exist and then did a defrag of my computer after having specific CTDs at specific times in campaigns and then even finally online. I reinstalled SH4 and did not run it. I then promptly applied patch 1.2 and the problem persisted. So, I redid everything again and applied patch 1 followed by patch 1.2. It played for a few days but then went from being a specific CTD at a specific time during the first campaign to now being random CTDs although maybe not as bad. The last time was just now as I was closing in on Japan and got a notice while in the map room that aircraft was spotted. When I chose to go to periscope depth, BANG! CTD! :damn: I will be so glad when my SH3 comes in that I ordered today from this web site. I’m done with SH4 unless they fix it! The thing will not run for me. :down:
Dimension E521
Athlon 64 3200+(2.00GHz, 512K)
2GB DDR2 SDRAM at over 600 MHz
256MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro
Windows XP Home
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.