View Full Version : Will there be a patch 1.4?
PepsiCan
07-23-07, 05:08 AM
Hi everyone
Since patch 1.3 came out, various issues have been uncovered and some issues have been found not be fixed. That's fine, that's how patches work in real life for the moment (so please, no rant in this thread on (the lack of) testing at UBI or complaining how it all went wrong and how you'll never buy a UBI game again).
That said, I believe (and that's my personal opinion) that an additional patch is required to fix some of the issues that seemingly cannot be modded. I would at least nominate:
- Switch for Contact/Contact Influence setting not working (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=118393)
- Subs at flank speed crash dive slower than subs that crash dive at 0 speed (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=118833)
- Making the "imperial measures" option truely imperial (i.e. deckgun range in yards instead of meters, the radar and sonar stations in yards)
- Fixing the 'ghost ship' issue: ships respawn quickly after you sank them and when you sink them again, you do not get the credit, but you have used up your torpedos
- A change request: Being in friendly territory, close to your base, running out of fuel and...well, and then never getting home as you can't ask for a tow (a tow should come with a serious penalty of course).
- Ironing out some (serious) graphic glitches regarding sailors becoming transparent when Volumetric Fog is enabled and the sun shining through metal
- Special missions, such as spy insertion, are still repeated even with the same destination.
- With early war conning towers, you cannot use the AA gun when having to fire to port or starboard. The metal plating of the conning tower blocks the view.
- Damage reports are not accurate. You will receive messages that the pressure hull is repaired but when you dive you sink like a brick. Same for engine repairs. You receive the message but when you touch the throttle, nothing happens.(http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=119742)
I've seen other issues as well, but those that I have seen myself can be/have been modded away.
Anybody have any news on whether there will be a new patch and what issues will be fixed?
thanx
FooFighters
07-23-07, 05:35 AM
I think it's up to the modders now..
Gladly there are some great modders here !
:up:
PepsiCan
07-23-07, 05:46 AM
I never heard Elenaiba or other developers saying this. So, what is the official word here? And if there isn't one, what should/needs to happen to let that word lean towards doing another patch?
TDK1044
07-23-07, 06:03 AM
Ubisoft hasn't stated that there won't be another patch. Until they do, another patch is always possible.
GnarPow
07-23-07, 07:44 AM
^^ +1
Although I would be thinking months at this point if anything
its still needed since there still are things to be fixed or added to the game !
mookiemookie
07-23-07, 08:44 AM
It has not been ruled out, but it hasn't been confirmed either.
This assumption of "game is finished" is really getting annoying.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=595305#post595305
I wouldn't hold my breath though.
SteamWake
07-23-07, 09:56 AM
Well if there going to abandon the sim at this point how about a SDK ?
PepsiCan
07-23-07, 10:19 AM
Well if there going to abandon the sim at this point how about a SDK ?
One question at a time.
- Let's first establish whether Ubi wants to release a patch 1.4.
- If not, then we go for phase two, which is to see whether we can change their minds.
- And if that fails, we'll ask them if we can have something else instead of a new patch to meet any problems with the current release.
I first want an indication on the first questions. Anything else is getting ahead of ourselves and will confuse the questions/debate.
:know:
Just look at what it took to get 1.3, so no, I dont think there will be patch 1.4.
Contrary to some of the ranting, the guys that made this actually care about it and want it to be as good as possible---and to be fair, the bones are there, including the intended modibility. I haven't written them off, myself.
tater
SteamWake
07-23-07, 10:24 AM
I dont know if you remember or know that we (the community) literally had to go on begging campaign to get 1.3 It was absurd and frankly somewhat embarrising.
Im thinking another patch is highly unlikely.
I was here, I remember. Doesn't change my opinion, however.
tater
Sailor Steve
07-23-07, 11:17 AM
its still needed since there still are things to be fixed or added to the game !
But there are still things to be fixed or added to SH3.
I completely agree that those things do need to be fixed, but the only ones who can give a real answer are UBISoft themselves.
John Channing
07-23-07, 11:30 AM
I dont know if you remember or know that we (the community) literally had to go on begging campaign to get 1.3 It was absurd and frankly somewhat embarrising.
Im thinking another patch is highly unlikely.
I remember what people thought was happening.
Doesn't necessarily mean it was what was happening.
JCC
:hmm: How about Neal asking Ubi what their plans are, seeing he's kinda close and personal with them? If anyone could get an answer it might be our Fearless Leader Neal, seeing they respect him. And I say that with no disrespect. :yep: Besides, they might just listen to him a bit more than the rest of us.
But only if he wants to step out in the bowspray and seek out the direction Ubi is going to take. ;)
SteamWake
07-23-07, 01:31 PM
I dont know if you remember or know that we (the community) literally had to go on begging campaign to get 1.3 It was absurd and frankly somewhat embarrising.
Im thinking another patch is highly unlikely.
I remember what people thought was happening.
Doesn't necessarily mean it was what was happening.
JCC
Well they went to great lengths to make it appear that way. Not just here on SubSim but on the offical forums as well. Why all the drama ?
Seeadler
07-23-07, 01:53 PM
In the business field of my company, software development for Embedded Systems, it is a matter of course to fix the problems in our products until they work in such a way like it were meant and for which our customers already paid. It does not play a role, whether a customer bought a module for 20€ or for 2000€, he must also not beg for the patches or praise us after he received them. It is for us simply a customer service.
Like Henry Ford said:
"It is not the employer who pays the wages. Employers only handle the money. It is the customer who pays the wages."
But here and now we are in the game dev/publishing business and that's another story ...so I think not, we don't see further Ubisoft patches for this game.
chopped50ford
07-23-07, 02:15 PM
I sure hope so, will UBI bail on us now?
John Channing
07-23-07, 03:51 PM
I dont know if you remember or know that we (the community) literally had to go on begging campaign to get 1.3 It was absurd and frankly somewhat embarrising.
Im thinking another patch is highly unlikely.
I remember what people thought was happening.
Doesn't necessarily mean it was what was happening.
JCC
Well they went to great lengths to make it appear that way. Not just here on SubSim but on the offical forums as well. Why all the drama ?
I agree there was/is a great deal of drama regarding 1.03. I just don't happen to think it was on the part of Ubisoft...
JCC
Did the DEV fix anything in atch 1.3? I find most of the same problems still exits, at least for me they do.........
Uninstall SH4, cleaned registry, installed SH4, patches to 1.3. Using all my own mods since I can't DL any....
Aaaaaaahhhhhh.... JUST found a site that has FREE DL of SH4 mods, I'd like to thank the person an his site but if I mention the site they may screw me an stop the DL's :)
Aaaaaaahhhhhh.... JUST found a site that has FREE DL of SH4 mods, I'd like to thank the person an his site but if I mention the site they may screw me an stop the DL's :)
Have a look here on subsim. The modders forum is probably the best place for SH4, SH3 and SH2 mods.
Oh, and I think 1.4 will be coming although I have very few problems with the game now.
its still needed since there still are things to be fixed or added to the game ! But there are still things to be fixed or added to SH3.
I completely agree that those things do need to be fixed, but the only ones who can give a real answer are UBISoft themselves.
deep down i know he loves me ... :p
Excalibur Bane
07-24-07, 02:00 PM
JCC
Well they went to great lengths to make it appear that way. Not just here on SubSim but on the offical forums as well. Why all the drama ?
I agree there was/is a great deal of drama regarding 1.03. I just don't happen to think it was on the part of Ubisoft...
JCC
A great deal of drama? That's putting it mildy. One of the QA testers manage to leak the final patch to us, and meanwhile half the moderators here assure that is that NOT the final patch, when it is in fact the final patch. It's "months old and many changes have been fixed". Well, obviously that was not the case. The leaked "beta" was identical. This is not professional, in any way or form. I feel sorry for the moderators and other people preaching that the beta was not final. It must suck to be lied to so badly. This will be my last Ubisoft game in the Silent Hunter series. :down:
Personally, I have had many hours of highly entertaining quality time playing Silent Hunter IV. It is not perfect, but it is a darn good approximation of submarine warfare in the Pacific during WWII.
I appreciate all of the work that the developers have put into this game and the subsequent patches. It is obvious that the devs really put their heart into it. I would welcome a 1.4 patch, but I recognize that it may not be possible from Ubisoft's business perspective. I hope they understand the value of taking care of their customers, though, and make their support decisions accordingly.
I'm a bit embarrassed, however, by all of the grousing about SHIV on these boards. So the game's not perfect. Neither am I. Nor is anyone else for that matter. I'm sorry that many of you are having such a miserable experience with it.
But SHIV is loads of fun, and I expect to spend many more hours enjoying it.
I don't know. It would have to be a monster patch and I just don't see Ubi being that concerned with standard computer games or customer service connected to those games. I would like to think that a game with this sims possibilies would be worth saving. But, other Ubi games have needed additional patches that didn't get them. Why should we think this game would be any different.
I for one am sadly disapointed with the game play quality of this game, not the art of the game. I swear I have tried hard to like this game and I guess I will continue to play it from time to time. But I am burnt out trying to mod this "thing" around to where I can enjoy playing it. Fix one thing and find two that might not have been broken in the last patch, but are now.
In my line of work I help people learn to deal with their problems day in and day out so when I need a break from reality. I want to enjoy something that helps relieve the stress not add to it with quality problems in the game.
Will there be a patch 4? I wouldn't bet on it. Would I recommend this game to others? I damn sure wouldn't bet on that. I think I am going to do one more clean install, go back to patch 2 and the mods that made it work then. If a patch 4 should appear then I will try it, but I will not count on it. I could handle being wrong. I could say I was wrong without hesitation if they could but make it right.
I for one am sadly disapointed with the game play quality of this game, not the art of the game. I swear I have tried hard to like this game
Same feeling here, but I am convinced it will get better one way or another...
It will be good in a couple of months, no matter who will fix it, UBI or the modders.
John Channing
07-24-07, 05:23 PM
JCC
Well they went to great lengths to make it appear that way. Not just here on SubSim but on the offical forums as well. Why all the drama ?
I agree there was/is a great deal of drama regarding 1.03. I just don't happen to think it was on the part of Ubisoft...
JCC
A great deal of drama? That's putting it mildy. One of the QA testers manage to leak the final patch to us, and meanwhile half the moderators here assure that is that NOT the final patch, when it is in fact the final patch. It's "months old and many changes have been fixed". Well, obviously that was not the case. The leaked "beta" was identical. This is not professional, in any way or form. I feel sorry for the moderators and other people preaching that the beta was not final. It must suck to be lied to so badly. This will be my last Ubisoft game in the Silent Hunter series. :down:
You know... if you are going to go so far out of your way as to ignore the actual subject of a conversation just to take the opportunity to call people liars you might just want to consider the thickness of the ice you are standing on.
You also might want to consider that you may not have a clue about what you are talking about.
JCC
Iron Budokan
07-24-07, 06:30 PM
I for one am sadly disapointed with the game play quality of this game, not the art of the game. I swear I have tried hard to like this game...
Me, too. And while it's off my computer and currently on the shelf, I haven't completely given up on it. I'll let the excellent modding community work on it for a while and then I look forward to coming back and having fun with Silent Hunter IV. :yep:
Camaero
07-24-07, 07:42 PM
I am surprised at some of the comments in this thread. I thought 1.3 did a great job on patching up the game. No more CTDs and no more idiot convoys. Almost everything else can be fixed by modders. Almost everything else HAS been fixed by modders. No different than how SHIII was.
1.4 would be awesome, but just a bonus, not a necessity in my very humble opinion.
Ducimus
07-24-07, 08:18 PM
Im gonna be the black sheep here and say...
Patch 1.4? Good god i hope not! I can't do this again!
Aaaaaaahhhhhh.... JUST found a site that has FREE DL of SH4 mods, I'd like to thank the person an his site but if I mention the site they may screw me an stop the DL's :)
Have a look here on subsim. The modders forum is probably the best place for SH4, SH3 and SH2 mods.
Oh, and I think 1.4 will be coming although I have very few problems with the game now.
I know, I know, I know, but most modders use sites I can't DL from an some mods are outta hand, no way am I DL a 43 m mod for 1 or 2 modification that I can do myself!..
TDK1044
07-25-07, 08:21 AM
The topic here is will there be a patch 1.4? The answer is that nobody knows but that it isn't out of the question.
Personally, with the game patched to 1.3 and modded using Trigger Maru 1.4 and a few small mods, I'm very happy with SH4. Having said that, I accept that I don't play at 100 percent realism and that there may be a few issues out there that a patch could take care of.
In my opinion, for most people though, this game is now very playable and enjoyable, and patch 1.4 would be nice but not essential. Just my opinion.
Rockin Robbins
07-25-07, 09:11 AM
At some point, the painter looks at his canvas and says, "Done." and walks away. Isn't there always something that could be added? How many things aren't modeled in Silent Hunter 4?
No trim dives to mark the negative buoyancy tank at the point where the boat is at neutral boyancy. Real subs did this regularly, usually once a day as salt water varies in specific gravity with local variations in the dissolved salt and mineral percentage, and especially changes in temperature.
No negative buoyancy tank at all! This was used to facilitate quick diving and ascent. Trimming it to neutral allowed maximum maneuverability while submerged.
If tubes were flooded and the torps not fired, the tubes were drained, the torps removed and the gyros and firing mechanisms disassembled, readjusted and reinstalled. This was a regular ritual on the most successful subs.
There is no rig for depth charge.
The four diesels and electrics are ganged together with no provision for independent control. There is no putting 2 diesels on propulsion and 2 to charge batteries like was necessary on the real subs.
The galley doesn't cook any food at all! Crew morale is not modeled. The head doesn't work, and where is it anyway? How many do you want?
The point is that the simulation is done when the developers say it is, and there will always be something we can point to and say it is missing. In my opinion the game is a blast as is and models enough complexity to remain interesting for an extended time. With the capabilities of current hardware and software, it is hard for me to imagine taking this to the next level of reality without sacrificing playability.
One thing that could be done is an online submarine with one person logged into each crewmember on board. That's a whole new game, but is possible with current technology.
I'm totally satisfied with Wolves of the Pacific as it now stands. I recommend that anyone looking for a submarine simulation buy this one and SH3. They cost about the same as a carton of cigarettes, and those unfortunate enough to buy those things kill off that carton in less than a week on average. We'll be playing these games for years. They're a great value, even at $50.00.
I would like to revise one statement I made yesterday. "Would I recommend this sim to someone?" My answer to myself was NO!. However, if someone who had been through SH2 & 3, (both of which are still on my computer) I could say "go for it" because they would know what they were going to be in for. I shouldn't, couldn't and wouldn't wish this sim off on someone who thought they were getting a great game out of the box. I play on hard level, I did the clean install followed the steps to patch one by one. But the radar still does not work in late Sept 42, but what do I care, I still get radar reports, even when I don't have radar installed, the battery recharge rate is a joke (no matter what combination of speeds/engine configerations you try). I can't bring myself to blame the Dev Team because some of them are on this forum or have visited it and they seem to feel as bad about the bugs as most of us. SO, does it need a patch 4? IMHO Yes. Will there be a patch 4? IMHO No. I have stated in other posts, "My faith is in the modders now." Someone should give Jones a big kiss and Thank You for his mod installer. I think a person would be crazy as H*** to try to mod this sim to a working condition without it. Patch 1.4, what an interesting idea. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
At some point, the painter looks at his canvas and says, "Done." and walks away. Isn't there always something that could be added? How many things aren't modeled in Silent Hunter 4?
I agree... but the issue now (re: a possible 1.4 patch) isn't about what's not modeled, but what's still broken. And yes, even here there's some gray... so I'll make a further distinction:
As far as I'm concerned, the RADAR is still broken. The A scope was obviously intended to be the SD, and the PPI was supposed to be the SJ. SH1 had this right. If that's not the case with SH4, the researchers didn't do their jobs. However, I'm willing to defer to the game designers here... if they say that's the way they intended it, and it works as intended, this doesn't make my list of things broken.
On the other hand, the contact/influence switch - regardless of any argument vis-a-vis real life technical and political issues - is clearly broken. It does not work as intended. Why this matters to me is I would choose to be one of those maverick skippers who covertly made modifications to my torpedos once underway to improve my chance of success. I do not appreciate the developers making that decision for me... particularly when it's fairly obvious that the current functionality is not a well considered choice on their part, but rather either the result of a bug or a bailing wire/chewing gum solution to a bug they didn't have time to fix properly.
IMHO, I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect a fix for things like that contact/influence switch.
JD
Lt commander lare
07-25-07, 10:49 AM
now that the periscopes are fixed i see no problems with silent hunter 4 i have been on 2 patrols and was badly attacked and made it all the way back to midway and then to pearl harbor if patch 1.4 is released i would install it but right now the game is great good job dev teams and modders
lt commander lare
Relentless Beating
07-25-07, 04:08 PM
I think Steamwake Is totally right on this one
At some point, the painter looks at his canvas and says, "Done." and walks away. Isn't there always something that could be added? How many things aren't modeled in Silent Hunter 4?
No trim dives to mark the negative buoyancy tank at the point where the boat is at neutral boyancy. Real subs did this regularly, usually once a day as salt water varies in specific gravity with local variations in the dissolved salt and mineral percentage, and especially changes in temperature.
No negative buoyancy tank at all! This was used to facilitate quick diving and ascent. Trimming it to neutral allowed maximum maneuverability while submerged.
If tubes were flooded and the torps not fired, the tubes were drained, the torps removed and the gyros and firing mechanisms disassembled, readjusted and reinstalled. This was a regular ritual on the most successful subs.
There is no rig for depth charge.
The four diesels and electrics are ganged together with no provision for independent control. There is no putting 2 diesels on propulsion and 2 to charge batteries like was necessary on the real subs.
The galley doesn't cook any food at all! Crew morale is not modeled. The head doesn't work, and where is it anyway? How many do you want?
The point is that the simulation is done when the developers say it is, and there will always be something we can point to and say it is missing. In my opinion the game is a blast as is and models enough complexity to remain interesting for an extended time. With the capabilities of current hardware and software, it is hard for me to imagine taking this to the next level of reality without sacrificing playability.
One thing that could be done is an online submarine with one person logged into each crewmember on board. That's a whole new game, but is possible with current technology.
I'm totally satisfied with Wolves of the Pacific as it now stands. I recommend that anyone looking for a submarine simulation buy this one and SH3. They cost about the same as a carton of cigarettes, and those unfortunate enough to buy those things kill off that carton in less than a week on average. We'll be playing these games for years. They're a great value, even at $50.00.
I agree for 100%
Prientje
07-25-07, 04:46 PM
At some point, the painter looks at his canvas and says, "Done." and walks away. Isn't there always something that could be added? How many things aren't modeled in Silent Hunter 4?
No trim dives to mark the negative buoyancy tank at the point where the boat is at neutral boyancy. Real subs did this regularly, usually once a day as salt water varies in specific gravity with local variations in the dissolved salt and mineral percentage, and especially changes in temperature.
No negative buoyancy tank at all! This was used to facilitate quick diving and ascent. Trimming it to neutral allowed maximum maneuverability while submerged.
If tubes were flooded and the torps not fired, the tubes were drained, the torps removed and the gyros and firing mechanisms disassembled, readjusted and reinstalled. This was a regular ritual on the most successful subs.
There is no rig for depth charge.
The four diesels and electrics are ganged together with no provision for independent control. There is no putting 2 diesels on propulsion and 2 to charge batteries like was necessary on the real subs.
The galley doesn't cook any food at all! Crew morale is not modeled. The head doesn't work, and where is it anyway? How many do you want?
The point is that the simulation is done when the developers say it is, and there will always be something we can point to and say it is missing. In my opinion the game is a blast as is and models enough complexity to remain interesting for an extended time. With the capabilities of current hardware and software, it is hard for me to imagine taking this to the next level of reality without sacrificing playability.
One thing that could be done is an online submarine with one person logged into each crewmember on board. That's a whole new game, but is possible with current technology.
I'm totally satisfied with Wolves of the Pacific as it now stands. I recommend that anyone looking for a submarine simulation buy this one and SH3. They cost about the same as a carton of cigarettes, and those unfortunate enough to buy those things kill off that carton in less than a week on average. We'll be playing these games for years. They're a great value, even at $50.00.
I agree for 100%
I'm totally satisfied with Wolves of the Pacific as it now stands. I recommend that anyone looking for a submarine simulation buy this one and SH3. They cost about the same as a carton of cigarettes, and those unfortunate enough to buy those things kill off that carton in less than a week on average. We'll be playing these games for years. They're a great value, even at $50.00.
laughable.....!
:rotfl:
people like you and others are the reason too, why we have only a a few patch...
do you know that this game has many not solved big bugs after patch 1.3 too ...??
do you know... do you know ect ect ect...
Maybe Ubi reads your and other "Thank you UBI Hallelulja let me kiss your feet Thread" one day after patch 1.3 release...
They think, great, they are all happy....
Enough patch work...
we dont need more patch...
patch work is over...!
As far as I'm concerned, the RADAR is still broken. The A scope was obviously intended to be the SD, and the PPI was supposed to be the SJ. SH1 had this right. If that's not the case with SH4, the researchers didn't do their jobs.
For the 144548745454th time, the radar is NOT broken. The devs have explicitly stated here the A-scope was, has been, and is intended for the SJ Radar, NOT the SD. The SD had its own separate A-scope, which is not modeled in the game. The first SJ radar sets operated off the A-scope alone, before the addition of PPI. Why can't you get that through your thick head?
As far as I'm concerned, the RADAR is still broken. The A scope was obviously intended to be the SD, and the PPI was supposed to be the SJ. SH1 had this right. If that's not the case with SH4, the researchers didn't do their jobs.
For the 144548745454th time, the radar is NOT broken. The devs have explicitly stated here the A-scope was, has been, and is intended for the SJ Radar, NOT the SD. The SD had its own separate A-scope, which is not modeled in the game. The first SJ radar sets operated off the A-scope alone, before the addition of PPI. Why can't you get that through your thick head?
I don't consider myself thick-headed (assuming you mean dumb or ignorant), thank you, nor (I believe) does anyone who actually knows me. I didn't insult you or anyone else... so lets just dispense with the attitude right here, shall we?
I hear and understand what you're saying, and what the devs have said. I simply don't believe it. While I understand that early SJ used an A-scope and later SJ used a PPI, I don't believe operational US subs during WWII carried both an A scope and a PPI for use with the SJ RADAR at the same time.
I do however believe that it was quite common to have an A-scope for SD installed alongside a PPI for SJ. I know this is how the RADAR was portrayed in SH1 and I believed then and believe now that they had it right.
Sorry if you disagree, but I think you'll find that happens on boards like these every now and again.
That said, I believe the point of my post was that RADAR is operating as the devs say they intended it to operate, therefore I would not make an issue (read, a reason to expect another patch) of it now.
OTOH, the current state of the contact/influence selector function does warrant a fix... IMHO.
That's all I'm saying. Not so unreasonable I think...?
JD
mookiemookie
07-26-07, 09:28 AM
people like you and others are the reason too, why we have only a a few patch...
do you know that this game has many not solved big bugs after patch 1.3 too ...??
Yeah, there wasn't any thousands-of-posts-long threads saying "give us patch 1.3!" or anything. I can totally see how it's our fault there aren't more patches for the game.
Maybe Ubi reads your and other "Thank you UBI Hallelulja let me kiss your feet Thread" one day after patch 1.3 release...
Ubi corporate ≠ development team. If you chose to read that thread as a "thank you Ubi" thread, then perhaps you should go back and read it again.
On that note, the developers have done a fine job getting the game whipped into shape and looking good and deserve a pat on the back.
laughable.....!
:rotfl:
Yes your post was laughable indeed.
people like you and others are the reason too, why we have only a a few patch...
do you know that this game has many not solved big bugs after patch 1.3 too ...??
Yeah, there wasn't any thousands-of-posts-long threads saying "give us patch 1.3!" or anything. I can totally see how it's our fault there aren't more patches for the game.
Maybe Ubi reads your and other "Thank you UBI Hallelulja let me kiss your feet Thread" one day after patch 1.3 release...
Ubi corporate ≠ development team. If you chose to read that thread as a "thank you Ubi" thread, then perhaps you should go back and read it again.
On that note, the developers have done a fine job getting the game whipped into shape and looking good and deserve a pat on the back.
laughable.....!
:rotfl:
Yes your post was laughable indeed.
Another post I agree 100% on.......:up:
Rockin Robbins
07-26-07, 09:57 AM
laughable.....!
:rotfl:
people like you and others are the reason too, why we have only a a few patch...
do you know that this game has many not solved big bugs after patch 1.3 too ...??
do you know... do you know ect ect ect...
Maybe Ubi reads your and other "Thank you UBI Hallelulja let me kiss your feet Thread" one day after patch 1.3 release...
They think, great, they are all happy....
Enough patch work...
we dont need more patch...
patch work is over...!
I think you make great sense. First, you ignore my list of unmodeled aspects of WWII submarines. Then you ignore my analogy to a painting, which is declared complete when the painter, not the observer, declares it is finished. Finally you postulate a world which operates on the basis of whether YOU are happy.
As you say, "laughable." :rotfl: You are entitled not to be happy. You are entitled not to purchase this game. You are entitled to be obsessed with some self-proclaimed ideal of perfection without which you will be miserable. You are entitled to that misery you so arrogantly claim for your own. I choose not to participate:yep:.
I am entitled to decide that I am happy. I am entitled to thank Ubi and the developers for a job well done. And I am entitled to look forward to an even greater future, where talented developers take submarine simulation to the next level of reality, only to be met with complainers like you who are not satisfied with the best submarine simulation the world has ever seen.
Please proceed to the conning tower to fume about the lack of periscope animations while the depth charges explode all around you and your crew wonders why you have abandoned your command to scrutinize irrelevent but pretty graphical effects. Thank you for your cooperation!:up:
If they do I hope they add a new Jap Escort. We didn't need the Colorado at all, what we need is more variation is escorts. In SH3 it wasn't so bad, you had US, and UK destroyers and frigates and DE's and Corvettes..
All we have in SH4 is 7 fleet class DD's (which rarely escorted convoys and stayed with fleet units) and the subchaser. The two little gunboats are a bit of a joke..
We need smaller escorts like the Momo (Matsu class), or the little frigates..
We desperatly need those for emersion, realism and a challenge..
Well Jace, I don't know what Tater did to the minesweeper, but it gave me a hell of a ride. It's listed as corvette, has active sonar and a sh1tload of DC's.
I saw Tater's sigh about modders making vessels, I remember a week or two ago downloading something from a russian site. It was a Vosper patrol vessel. I don't know if it's of any interrest?
John Channing
07-26-07, 01:12 PM
We desperatly need those for emersion, realism and a challenge..
I am just north of the Solomons and I have 2 DD's and 2 Subchasers I would like to introduce to you!
JCC
Excalibur Bane
07-26-07, 02:11 PM
Well, as has been said, it's kind of up in the air as to whether or not they are developing a v1.4 patch or not. Certainly the developers have wanted to, you can tell as much by a couple of posts around here by some of the development team. Whether UBI will provide the funding, is another story entirely.
In any event, it would probably be a good idea if we had a master list of all the remaining issues stickied at the top of the forum, along with any known workarounds. Ditto for things that are features, that commonly are mistaken for bugs. It would cut down on redundant posting and would give them a place to start from if they do decide to work on a new patch.
SHARKMEAT
07-26-07, 04:01 PM
The only problem I have is in the sound department, I can't hear the crew talking or watch officers knowledge my commands that I give. I tried to turn down certain sound to increase the crew sounds, but so far no luck. I wish a modder could amp the sounds up or make new one lol.....CHEERS
I hear and understand what you're saying, and what the devs have said. I simply don't believe it. While I understand that early SJ used an A-scope and later SJ used a PPI, I don't believe operational US subs during WWII carried both an A scope and a PPI for use with the SJ RADAR at the same time.
Incorrect. USS Cobia, with the oldest working radar set (1943):
http://www.usscobia.com/sj-1.html
http://www.usscobia.com/pics1.html
Range: 5-inch A-scope with range step and dial.
PPI: A 5-inch PPI is provided with SJ-a and SJ-1
Now, can we dispense with that argument already?
I do however believe that it was quite common to have an A-scope for SD installed alongside a PPI for SJ. I know this is how the RADAR was portrayed in SH1 and I believed then and believe now that they had it right.
Maybe, maybe not. Yes, the SD radar did operate off an A-scope, but from what I've read (and heard from the devs) the SD radar was moved out of the conning tower and into the command room with the advent of SJ radar. Nothing I've seen says the SD was kept installed alongside the SJ radar. There just isn't any room for it.
So, what we have in SH4 1.3 is this:
The usable A-scope display is for the SJ radar set only. Even though the early SD radar sets were installed in the conning tower and did use an A-scope display, they are always modeled as being in the command room, under the control of the AI only. What we need, then, is a separate textual warning for SD radar contacts, since the SD radar was non-directional. That is what's broken with the radar as depicted in 1.3.
Peace? :)
"...Just look at what it took to get 1.3, so no, I dont think there will be patch 1.4..."
Huh? There was a LOT of yelling on the forums based on nothing. Speculation. Misinformation. Irresponsible reporting and conduct on the part of people "others" thought knew something or "should" know something, but knew nothing. I gives people with nothing to do a sense of self importance.
Until you get an official statement from UBI (not just rumor from a non-paid forum admin) everything you read about no more patches is pure speculation, wishful thinking and forum fodder good for nothing but self amusement.
The same quote above has been made about every patch we've seen so far. Zurg pucky.
-Pv-
USS Cobia, with the oldest working radar set (1943):
http://www.usscobia.com/sj-1.html
http://www.usscobia.com/pics1.html
Wow, Luke, looking at those pictures, the radar the devs gave us in 1.3 is spot on. These pictures could have been taken from any ingame radar. Great stuff. :up:
Fearless
07-26-07, 07:07 PM
Im gonna be the black sheep here and say...
Patch 1.4? Good god i hope not! I can't do this again!
LOL. I see your point Ducimus. On my side of the fence: I enjoy patch 1.3 with TM 1.4 and any other mods I use. The game is a vast improvement from when it 1st came out. I'm really not that fussed if another patch is forthcoming besides there's a lot of stuff that can be tweaked and added and as far as I'm concerned kudos to all the modders that give this community a new dimension in gameplay and if you're looking for perfection, these guys are sure as hell close to achieving it. :yep:
Rockin Robbins
07-26-07, 09:08 PM
as far as I'm concerned kudos to all the modders that give this community a new dimension in gameplay and if you're looking for perfection, these guys are sure as hell close to achieving it. :yep:
Arrrrrrrr! Kudos all 'round! Ducimus, I made you a double! A toast: to the developer team and the best modders this side of Lord of the Rings! *clink* :arrgh!:
harrymanback
07-28-07, 05:48 AM
For ****s sake Ubisoft fix the ****ing repeating missions bug! I'm mean do other people not have this problem, or they do and they're not bothered by it, or what? I've never come across such a basic, ridiculous bug thats still in a game after 3 patches. Is there a mod that will just fix this (I don't want a mod that will fix it but also make the game harder/more realistic etc).
All I want to be able to load up a campaign and not have to patrol the south china sea again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again...
Front Runner
07-28-07, 08:05 AM
I play SH4 although I am disappointed with the "finished" product. It is my belief that the subsim fans have been let down with SH4.
As a consumer of compuer games, I enjoy shopping the stores and perusing the computer game magazines for upcoming games or sequels to games that I have enjoyed in the past. There are many games which I play regularly and enjoy and associate that enjoyment with a particular title or publisher. Sid Meir games are particularly high on my list, for example the Civilization series and the Pirates series of games. I know that when I purchase a Sid Meir game (Firaxis) I will get the support and patch developement necessary to fix gameplay problems and improve the game play on a somewhat regular basis without having to whine and beg for them.
I have noticed a change in my shopping behavior, that is, if a game is published by UBISOFT, I tend to immediately move on, ignoring the advertising and pretty packaging. UBISOFT in my opinion is no longer on my "buy" list and I will never purchase a UBISOFT title on release date. It will take many, many positive reviews and a good deal of positive community support of any new UBISOFT title before I will ever spend another dollar on a UBISOFT product.
ryanwigginton
07-28-07, 10:33 AM
For ****s sake Ubisoft fix the ****ing repeating missions bug! I'm mean do other people not have this problem, or they do and they're not bothered by it, or what? I've never come across such a basic, ridiculous bug thats still in a game after 3 patches. Is there a mod that will just fix this (I don't want a mod that will fix it but also make the game harder/more realistic etc).
All I want to be able to load up a campaign and not have to patrol the south china sea again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again...
I've yet to start a third patrol, and only once (maybe twice) started a second. I'm guessing your playing with the realism turned right down. :stare:
"...It is my belief that the subsim fans have been let down with SH4..."
You are speaking for yourself and not everyone.
"...improve the game play on a somewhat regular basis without having to whine and beg for them..."
I've not whined for a patch even once nor has UBI officially stated at any time there would be be more patches.
Nice there are enough whiners here for everyone to benefit without having to contribute to it.
-Pv-
Incorrect. USS Cobia, with the oldest working radar set (1943):
Well, I'll be darned...
You're right, I'm wrong.
I still don't like the always on SD though...
Peace? :)
Sure thing.
JD
Rockin Robbins
07-30-07, 01:22 PM
I declare peace! Everybody reload.:arrgh!:
SteamWake
07-30-07, 01:41 PM
I declare peace! Everybody reload.:arrgh!:
That would be a time out. ;)
For ****s sake Ubisoft fix the ****ing repeating missions bug! I'm mean do other people not have this problem, or they do and they're not bothered by it, or what? I've never come across such a basic, ridiculous bug thats still in a game after 3 patches. Is there a mod that will just fix this (I don't want a mod that will fix it but also make the game harder/more realistic etc).
All I want to be able to load up a campaign and not have to patrol the south china sea again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again...
I have the same problem, I can't believe it. I started 3 careers and it's the same thing. After 2 or 3 missions it's always the same. There are other bugs with 1.3 but they are "minor". This repeating missions bug prevents me from playing career, an I can't accept that. This game is not finished and if Ubisoft doesn't correct this bug I'll never buy again a game from them.
Rockin Robbins
07-31-07, 06:59 AM
It reflects real life, where Admiral Lockwood and Admiral Christy both did this.
Hey, this is war. You expect to like all your assignments? You know the territory and one Jap freighter looks and sinks like any other in any other piece of ocean. What more do you want? Do your duty son, and you'll get the plum assignments. Until then, let's see some work ethic. I'm not sending you into the meat grinder until I can see you've learned enough to survive out there. You're showing progress, but let's not get overconfident. You're not going to do me any good in thousands of pieces on the bottom of the Sea of Japan. Dismissed!
Woof1701
07-31-07, 07:20 AM
After reading in this forum for a while I have to add something:
After what it took you to beg for that last patch, and taking my own experience with previous Silent Hunter games, I'm sure there won't be another patch!
BUT, there is one thing you should consider that noone has mentioned yet. Let's go back in time a little.
For those who do not know: SH3 was declared finished when there were many more loose ends to tie up. SH3 with patch 1.4 is not really that much better than stock SH3. Enemy AI was aweful, there were graphics and gameplay glitches that made playing it a real nuisance at times. Important features were missing, and historical facts were wrong. Patched SH2 was even far worse BTW.
But there is a good thing that came out of SH3 being an unfinished subsim. Many people liked SH3 nevertheless and saw potential to improve it themselves. The graphics were good and the gameplay and career was sound. The modders learned the hard way how to mod the game, and improve it and add new features, many of which were said to be impossible without an SDK. And look what we have now! The supermods introduced new Theaters of Operation like the Black Sea and the Pacific, wolfpacks and milk cows were implemented, graphics were improved. The amount of available ships has been doubled. New sounds were implemented to make the game more immersive. Enemy AI (which was the worst problem of all) was more or less tweaked to realistic and still enjoyable proportions. And there were so many more improvements that it would take me hours to write them down here. But still SH3 is nor finished! New mods come out every day, and we're still waiting for the latest (and sadly the last) update to the Grey Wolves supermod.
AND ALL SH4 PLAYERS WILL BENEFIT FROM THAT!
Because the good thing that came out of this for SH4 is that the sims are similar when it comes to modding, so a lot of expertise painstakenly gained by the SH3 modders are now modding SH4 without having to have learnt everything from scratch again.
From reading in this forum it also seems that the problems and glitches people are complaining about in SH4 are minor in comparison to what SH3 was like after the Devs stopped patching it. Since I don't have SH4 yet I can't be sure of course.
So don't be so negative. I'm reasonably sure the modders will attend to most of the problems. You will see improvements and most likely solutions to most of the problems that there currently are. Give it some time. :yep:
Penelope_Grey
07-31-07, 08:25 AM
I've read this thread, and I am stunned, really stunned at a lot of what I have seen here. I won't pick out individual quotes or posters but so many here standing and saying "I never complained about SH4" "I think the developers did a great job" "It doesn't need more patches."
I think Ubisoft and the game developers are obliged to deliver more patches to us. For one thing, you wouldn't put up with a toaster that kept ejecting the toast before it was ready, you'd take it back to the shop with the recipt and demand a refund, or to have it fixed. Since we all spent good money on this game I think we have a right to expect it to work properly.
Its all well and good for others then to sit back and say "The modders will fix it." Well yes Im sure they will and I have lots of faith in them... but... why should they have to? Its the duty of ubisoft and the developers to make sure the game is fixed.
I was about when the begfest for 1.3 began. I refused outright then to take part in that, my attitude is, I won't beg for anything, and I sure as hell won't beg for something I am actually entitled to have. When we first purchased SH4, we were sold a deffective product. As I say, you wouldn't take it from a toaster, a TV, a washing machine, anything... so why sit back and take it from this?
Schultzy
07-31-07, 08:41 AM
Its all well and good for others then to sit back and say "The modders will fix it."
why should they have to?
I refused outright then to take part
my attitude is, I won't beg for anything, I sure as hell won't beg for something I am actually entitled to have.
why sit back and take it from this?
So in short you think we shouldn't beg the developers to do something that they're not obligated to do and they wont do now that they have our money, not that you would do that anyway and besides there are modders around who'll fix it, not that you would if you were them. Clear as mud, thanks. :)
mookiemookie
07-31-07, 08:59 AM
I think Ubisoft and the game developers are obliged to deliver more patches to us. For one thing, you wouldn't put up with a toaster that kept ejecting the toast before it was ready, you'd take it back to the shop with the recipt and demand a refund, or to have it fixed. Since we all spent good money on this game I think we have a right to expect it to work properly.
Its all well and good for others then to sit back and say "The modders will fix it." Well yes Im sure they will and I have lots of faith in them... but... why should they have to? Its the duty of ubisoft and the developers to make sure the game is fixed.
You're missing a very important distinction here. The development team has stated on these very forums that they "wanted to implement this feature, they wanted to fix this issue, they wanted to put more work into X, etc, they'd like to fix this still-existing problem"
They cannot do any of that, as much as they want to, without the blessing of Ubisoft. They can't release another patch without corporate signing off on it.
Place the blame where it belongs.
Woof1701
07-31-07, 08:59 AM
Unfortunately in the past ten years I owned no complex game or simulation that I would have pronounced completely finished. It's true that software companies nowadays often tend to publish a game before it's finished. Sad truth, but the next problem is forums like this one. Don't misunderstand me. I love this forum and what it has done for Silent Hunter 2-4, but it also means that since everyone finds different things not to his taste and complains about it here, many problems are being exaggerated and some are just being created. In fact I've read about problems in game forums that I never would have even thought about and I've seen perfectly playable games flamed by people who just had nothing better to do.
I'm out on a limb here. I don't say that SH4 is perfect the way it is now, and I wouldn't dare since I don't even own it. But since it seems playable and enjoyable to many people with the newest patch and it seems stable as well. That's much more that I could say about SH3 1.4b. So why blame the devs just because it doesn't meet everyones requirements and there are things that could be better? NO sim will ever satisfy everyone and you can always make something better. But leave that to the modders.
TDK1044
07-31-07, 09:19 AM
The reality is that it's cheaper to pay a Dev team for 11 months work, and then pay a much smaller Dev team to patch the game, than it is to pay the full Dev team for the 18 months that they should have been given in the first place to build this game.
That's the way accountants think. Sad but true.
PepsiCan
07-31-07, 09:29 AM
Hi
Let me clarify why I started this thread.
1) Patch 1.3 does make the game very playable. But that nevertheless leaves some bugs still out there (see the start of the thread).
2) Great that people have faith in the modders, but what about all those people who bought the game and don't know anything about Subsim and the modding community? I myself, didn't find out what a mod was until I bought SH4 and by accident stumbled over the subsim website. In the mean time I have now found out that I own at least three other games with a modding community. So, for those people who don't know what modding is, a patch is the only way they'll get hold of a fix for a problem.
3) I didn't want to start a discussion about whether we need a new patch or not. What I was after was a response from Ubisoft or someone close to them. I know that some Ubi devs have stated in subsim that it is by no means certain 1.3 is the last patch, so I wanted to see if there is a way we can support their case.
Edit: And my heart felt apologies to Ducimus for trying to get a fourth patch ;-)
TDK1044
07-31-07, 09:41 AM
I didn't want to start a discussion about whether we need a new patch or not. What I was after was a response from Ubisoft or someone close to them. I know that some Ubi devs have stated in subsim that it is by no means certain 1.3 is the last patch, so I wanted to see if there is a way we can support their case.
I think the Devs will assess the need for a patch 1.4, knowing that their bosses will only authorize such a patch for critical issues and not 'wish list' issues.
My own view is that patch 1.4 would be nice in order to mop up a few outstanding issues, but that this game is now very playable and enjoyable patched to 1.3 and modded to taste.
I'm now more interested in the bigger issue of the Silent Hunter franchise. I truly hope that SH4 is selling well and that Ubisoft are actively considering SH5.
Penelope_Grey
07-31-07, 10:34 AM
So in short you think we shouldn't beg the developers to do something that they're not obligated to do and they wont do now that they have our money, not that you would do that anyway and besides there are modders around who'll fix it, not that you would if you were them. Clear as mud, thanks. :)
Your very welcome... but...
First up, no, I don't think we should beg. The game was not up to par, millions of copies of a below par game are sold, if the companies behind SH4 thought anything of their customers they would make a concerned effort to fix it without the need of said customers to beg. Yet that is what it took for patch 1.3, lots of fans pleading for a patch like dogs begging for a treat.
Secondly, don't try to teach your granny to suck eggs... I never said modders shouldn't fix the game, I said with regards to modders fixing the game - "yes Im sure they will (fix the game that is) and I have lots of faith in them... but... why should they have to? Its the duty of ubisoft and the developers to make sure the game is fixed."
And I am not going to budge on that fact. SH3 was the same it took 4 patches to put it right, but at least the four patches came out to get it up to par. SH4 needs to be treated the same.
You're missing a very important distinction here. The development team has stated on these very forums that they "wanted to implement this feature, they wanted to fix this issue, they wanted to put more work into X, etc, they'd like to fix this still-existing problem"
They cannot do any of that, as much as they want to, without the blessing of Ubisoft. They can't release another patch without corporate signing off on it.
Place the blame where it belongs.
If I were to place the game where it belongs, I would place it with myself first and foremost for being silly enough to talk my brother into a buying a copy for us even though he said wait. At the time I had no job and was skint, but just getting well into SH3 so I thought, it would be cool to have SH4.
You say place the blame where it belongs... Well frankly I don't give a monkeys who is at fault, be it ubisoft or the developers or whether its six of one and half a dozen of the other... the end result is the same I (and others) am sat with a game that is not up to scratch, yet it is very playable at present have to admit.
I just want to be 100% clear on one thing, I respect and admire the efforts of the modders and what they do, without them, SH3 and 4 would be quite dire all things considered. But I don't think its fair that they are the ones the community leans on to get all the game issues fixed (immaterial of if they mind or not). That is my point. Myself and others paid for a product that is effectively, deffective in a lot of respects. There should be as many patches as it takes to get it fixed, in the long run it makes good business sense for them concerned if they show loyalty to their customers, stands to reasons their customers will show loyalty to them.
Nightmare
07-31-07, 11:02 AM
And I am not going to budge on that fact. SH3 was the same it took 4 patches to put it right, but at least the four patches came out to get it up to par. SH4 needs to be treated the same.Actually after 1.4 patch for SH3 there was still a lot of outstanding bugs and some things still didn’t work right. 1.4 made SH3 very playable at that point. I’d go so far as to say it was as playable as SH4 with 1.3.
My personal opinion of SH3 was the game wasn’t up to snuff till 1.4 + GWX, however that is my opinion. I still had fun with SH3 even at patch 1.2, just like I’ve been having fun with SH4 since 1.1 was released.
mookiemookie
07-31-07, 11:14 AM
This game is not finished and if Ubisoft doesn't correct this bug I'll never buy again a game from them.
http://img.search.com/thumb/2/21/Carnac.jpg/180px-Carnac.jpg
Carnac says you'll be preordering Assassin's Creed.
It reflects real life, where Admiral Lockwood and Admiral Christy both did this.
Hey, this is war. You expect to like all your assignments? You know the territory and one Jap freighter looks and sinks like any other in any other piece of ocean. What more do you want? Do your duty son, and you'll get the plum assignments. Until then, let's see some work ethic. I'm not sending you into the meat grinder until I can see you've learned enough to survive out there. You're showing progress, but let's not get overconfident. You're not going to do me any good in thousands of pieces on the bottom of the Sea of Japan. Dismissed!
I wonder if this is ironic or not ? If not, well... OBVIOUSLY it's a bug. I'm not against "hard" games that are hard to reflect reality. I saw a sentence in a game review saying something like "this game is hard but nobody ever said war is easy".
But the repeating missions IS a bug. For example every time I dock to base I get the same screen saying I've been awarded for my 2nd mission. Even if it was the 4th or 5th mission. The date on this screen is always the same, etc etc.
This game is not finished and if Ubisoft doesn't correct this bug I'll never buy again a game from them.
http://img.search.com/thumb/2/21/Carnac.jpg/180px-Carnac.jpg
Carnac says you'll be preordering Assassin's Creed.
It's not a game I'm waiting for. Anyway last Ubisoft game I bought before SH4 was Faces of War which disappointed me a lot too (much too scripted SP missions, etc). I thought "maybe next time I'll have more luck". And no. That's all.
John Channing
07-31-07, 03:14 PM
I really wish two things....
1) Someone could tell me what are all of these critical show stopping bugs that are so capable of twisting so many pairs of panties?
2) Why I am on my first career, 4th Submarine (S -37, USS Snapper, USS Drum and now USS Balao), 10th patrol and have never had a repeating mission or been retired?
JCC
Nightmare
07-31-07, 04:05 PM
I really wish two things....
1) Someone could tell me what are all of these critical show stopping bugs that are so capable of twisting so many pairs of panties?
There aren't any big showstoppers that are left. The radar being completely useless has been fixed, not to mention an improved interface. The fast/slow torpedo selector resetting bug has been fixed. The AI has been improved so as to not sit around with a thumb up their nose while you torpedo the whole convoy.
Those are the big ones off the top of my head that were a problem in 1.2. Sure, there are still some annoying bugs (like the transparent crewmembers that are on watch) but they hardly make the game unplayable.
2) Why I am on my first career, 4th Submarine (S -37, USS Snapper, USS Drum and now USS Balao), 10th patrol and have never had a repeating mission or been retired?
JCC
That’s because you probably actually follow your orders and complete your objectives. As long as I’ve completed my objective and radioed back to base I’ve never been give the same mission twice in a row. As a matter of fact, I’ve never been forced to retire either.
I’m really beginning to wonder if the whole repeating mission/retire bug is due to people not understanding how the game works. It’s along the same lines as the posts of people screaming “bug!” at the circle running torpedoes or the magnetic influence detonators not working. The circle runners really happened and the influence detonators never worked during the war.
I haven't had any repeat missions lately, but I've been testing with different campaign versions, so I don;t get to keep up a career long.
Anyway, the one time I had that bug was harbor photography at surabaya. I took all the required pictures until it said I was complete and went home. None the less got the same mission again and again.
Having started messing with patrols, that part of the campaign is actually very complicated, it might be as simple as a typo someplace, and it would be HARD to find having messed with it myself.
tater
John Channing
07-31-07, 08:29 PM
I really wish two things....
1) Someone could tell me what are all of these critical show stopping bugs that are so capable of twisting so many pairs of panties?
There aren't any big showstoppers that are left. The radar being completely useless has been fixed, not to mention an improved interface. The fast/slow torpedo selector resetting bug has been fixed. The AI has been improved so as to not sit around with a thumb up their nose while you torpedo the whole convoy.
Those are the big ones off the top of my head that were a problem in 1.2. Sure, there are still some annoying bugs (like the transparent crewmembers that are on watch) but they hardly make the game unplayable.
2) Why I am on my first career, 4th Submarine (S -37, USS Snapper, USS Drum and now USS Balao), 10th patrol and have never had a repeating mission or been retired?
JCC
That’s because you probably actually follow your orders and complete your objectives. As long as I’ve completed my objective and radioed back to base I’ve never been give the same mission twice in a row. As a matter of fact, I’ve never been forced to retire either.
I’m really beginning to wonder if the whole repeating mission/retire bug is due to people not understanding how the game works. It’s along the same lines as the posts of people screaming “bug!” at the circle running torpedoes or the magnetic influence detonators not working. The circle runners really happened and the influence detonators never worked during the war.
Give the man a cigar!
JCC
nomdeplume
08-01-07, 09:14 AM
Am I the only one that's disappointed by how completely and utterly unfinished this game is?
Right after installing 1.3, I checked my bank balance and it was no different than before 1.3, just like 1.2 and 1.1 made no difference. I don't understand how a company that claims to want to give its customers enjoyable, quality entertainment products can sell a game like SH4 without making all their customers millionaires!
How the frack is anyone supposed to fully enjoy this game if they have to work for a living?! That's a good 8 hours every single weekday that I have to spend at work instead of stalking Jap convoys, all because Ubisoft couldn't be bothered releasing a finished product which contains everything one needs to get maximum enjoyment from it. Many times during the week I don't have time to play this game AT ALL! How am I supposed to fully appreciate the tension of being hunted, the adrenaline rush of being depth charged, the thrill of seeing (or hearing) your fish tear apart their prized tanker or battleship, or the attention to detail if I'm not able to play it constantly?
So please Ubisoft, we NEED a 1.4 patch. They are fully aware that we're only able to play games in our extremely limited spare time, so releasing a game this fun without also giving us the copious amounts of spare time required to be able to fully enjoy it is simply inexcusable.
I DEMAND PATCH 1.4 MILLION DOLLARS!
PepsiCan
08-01-07, 09:26 AM
Maybe it is me, but I can't quite follow you here. What specific items in SH4 do you have an issue with? Is there anything in the list of the first post in the thread that you wish to add something to?
mookiemookie
08-01-07, 09:31 AM
Maybe it is me, but I can't quite follow you here. What specific items in SH4 do you have an issue with? Is there anything in the list of the first post in the thread that you wish to add something to?
It's not just you. I don't get what he's so upset about either. "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" and all that.
The only thing not on the first post list, and arguably the most annoying bug left, is the repeat mission bug.
There might be some way to avoid it, maybe, but it's counter intuitive whatever it is cause so many people report it.
PepsiCan
08-01-07, 09:47 AM
The only thing not on the first post list, and arguably the most annoying bug left, is the repeat mission bug.
To be honest, I am not sure whether that is a bug or a feature. I believe it was on the fix list for patch 1.3. I haven't checked that but if so, a lot of these reports might actually be caused by installation problems.
From what I've read in "Silent Service" most boats patrolled in certain areas (Honshu, Formosa Strait and Philipines were the most common destinations I believe) and most skippers were sent to the same location, time and time again. Only the Narwhal class boats and occasionally some float boats did anything other than patrol an area and rake up tonnage.
Furthermore, special ops like dropping off agents and the like was mostly done by the Australian based boats. Pearl boats rarely got involved except when serving as shields for taskforce operations.
So, it should be repetitive I think. Furthermore, it doesn't really matter where you sink your ships, does it?:know:
ReallyDedPoet
08-01-07, 09:48 AM
a finished product which contains everything one needs to get maximum enjoyment from it.
That's a perfect world ^^^, we are not in that one. SH4 1.3 is a great game, modders have and will do the rest :yep:
RDP
dean_acheson
08-01-07, 09:56 AM
Maybe it is me, but I can't quite follow you here. What specific items in SH4 do you have an issue with? Is there anything in the list of the first post in the thread that you wish to add something to?
It's not just you. I don't get what he's so upset about either. "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" and all that.
Ouch there Benji! Or was it Quentin?
mookiemookie
08-01-07, 10:13 AM
Maybe it is me, but I can't quite follow you here. What specific items in SH4 do you have an issue with? Is there anything in the list of the first post in the thread that you wish to add something to?
It's not just you. I don't get what he's so upset about either. "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" and all that.
Ouch there Benji! Or was it Quentin?
MACBETH:
Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
I agree at some level, pepsi. Of course I also think many of the special ops missions are absurd. Any spy drop offs to japan, and all the harbor photography missions.
the problem would be that if you had a special mission over and over again, not a patrol. Say I fixed all the missions. PH special missions would be early war supply to Bataan, later you'd get some beach defense photog missions (tarawa, etc). Brisbane gets coastwatcher drops, and various Philipines stuff for MacArthur. Ditto Freemantle.
Those would be cool, but if you got "deliver a coastwatcher to Vella Lavella" 5 times in a row... kinda lame.
tater
John Channing
08-01-07, 03:47 PM
Maybe it is me, but I can't quite follow you here. What specific items in SH4 do you have an issue with? Is there anything in the list of the first post in the thread that you wish to add something to?
It's not just you. I don't get what he's so upset about either. "Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" and all that.
I believe it was humour/irony. At least I that's how I got it...
JCC
seaniam81
08-01-07, 07:09 PM
I agree at some level, pepsi. Of course I also think many of the special ops missions are absurd. Any spy drop offs to japan, and all the harbor photography missions.
the problem would be that if you had a special mission over and over again, not a patrol. Say I fixed all the missions. PH special missions would be early war supply to Bataan, later you'd get some beach defense photog missions (tarawa, etc). Brisbane gets coastwatcher drops, and various Philipines stuff for MacArthur. Ditto Freemantle.
Those would be cool, but if you got "deliver a coastwatcher to Vella Lavella" 5 times in a row... kinda lame.
tater
Or if you have to go photograph Tokyo harbour twice in a row. I would hazard a guess and say more times after that but i died on my way out the second time and started up a new career in a sugar boat and is way more fun.
Rockin Robbins
08-02-07, 06:49 AM
Am I the only one that's disappointed by how completely and utterly unfinished this game is?
Right after installing 1.3, I checked my bank balance and it was no different than before 1.3, just like 1.2 and 1.1 made no difference. I don't understand how a company that claims to want to give its customers enjoyable, quality entertainment products can sell a game like SH4 without making all their customers millionaires!
How the frack is anyone supposed to fully enjoy this game if they have to work for a living?! That's a good 8 hours every single weekday that I have to spend at work instead of stalking Jap convoys, all because Ubisoft couldn't be bothered releasing a finished product which contains everything one needs to get maximum enjoyment from it. Many times during the week I don't have time to play this game AT ALL! How am I supposed to fully appreciate the tension of being hunted, the adrenaline rush of being depth charged, the thrill of seeing (or hearing) your fish tear apart their prized tanker or battleship, or the attention to detail if I'm not able to play it constantly?
So please Ubisoft, we NEED a 1.4 patch. They are fully aware that we're only able to play games in our extremely limited spare time, so releasing a game this fun without also giving us the copious amounts of spare time required to be able to fully enjoy it is simply inexcusable.
I DEMAND PATCH 1.4 MILLION DOLLARS!
And each game should come with a sense of humor as good as yours. You have to excuse these people, especially the moderators, who have had to put with people throwing fits and crying because they can't see the periscopes go up and down if they spend their time in the conning tower instead of fighting their boat. Or they're hysterical about seeing the sun through the conning tower or some other detail inconsequential to how the game plays. Frankly, they're understandably a bit punch drunk right now and aren't ready for spot on humor that illustrates the ubsurdity of complaints by using ubsurdity. I can appreciate their position. I loved your post!
PepsiCan
08-02-07, 06:54 AM
MACBETH:
Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
I got this! One of the best responses I've ever seen.
PepsiCan
08-02-07, 06:57 AM
I agree at some level, pepsi. Of course I also think many of the special ops missions are absurd. Any spy drop offs to japan, and all the harbor photography missions.
the problem would be that if you had a special mission over and over again, not a patrol. Say I fixed all the missions. PH special missions would be early war supply to Bataan, later you'd get some beach defense photog missions (tarawa, etc). Brisbane gets coastwatcher drops, and various Philipines stuff for MacArthur. Ditto Freemantle.
Those would be cool, but if you got "deliver a coastwatcher to Vella Lavella" 5 times in a row... kinda lame.
tater
Yup, special missions repeating is not correct. Makes me wonder whether the mission selection is simply a random pick. I have my iPod choosing songs randomly. It's surprising how often it will play the same artist two times in a row :D
Which files/area holds the missions? And how does the software pick them (for as far as we know)?
mookiemookie
08-02-07, 07:31 AM
MACBETH:
Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
I got this! One of the best responses I've ever seen.
Hee hee...too bad I used it in response to a post that went waaaay over my head. I completely and totally missed his joke. Ah well. :88)
The only thing not on the first post list, and arguably the most annoying bug left, is the repeat mission bug.
To be honest, I am not sure whether that is a bug or a feature. I believe it was on the fix list for patch 1.3. I haven't checked that but if so, a lot of these reports might actually be caused by installation problems.
From what I've read in "Silent Service" most boats patrolled in certain areas (Honshu, Formosa Strait and Philipines were the most common destinations I believe) and most skippers were sent to the same location, time and time again. Only the Narwhal class boats and occasionally some float boats did anything other than patrol an area and rake up tonnage.
Furthermore, special ops like dropping off agents and the like was mostly done by the Australian based boats. Pearl boats rarely got involved except when serving as shields for taskforce operations.
So, it should be repetitive I think. Furthermore, it doesn't really matter where you sink your ships, does it?:know:
Of course this could be a feature. But for example do you find it normal to get the agent insertion every time ? I tried to see how much time it would last. I have done (completed objectives) the mission again and again. I gave up after more than ONE YEAR (in the game). Do you know a real sub which only did agent insertion missions during more than a year ?
There are many evidences that show it is a bug : one of them is every time i come back to harbour I have the same screen with the same medal the same date and the same patrol number. When after 10 (completed) patrols, in December, I am told I have just been awarded for my 2nd patrol in August, I can't tell it's a feature.
PepsiCan
08-02-07, 11:35 AM
Like I said a few posts back, repeating special missions, like agent insertion and photo missions, shouldn't be repetitive. But having to go to the East China Sea or Formosa Strait should be repetitive as that was the bread and butter of subs.
And yes, there were three subs in the US Navy that did mostly special ops: Narwhal, Nautilus and Argonaut. That happened basically because they were too big and slow (took them ages to dive for example) to do convoy attacks. But the Narwhal class isn't part of the game, so...
Sailor Steve
08-02-07, 04:33 PM
Am I the only one that's disappointed by how completely and utterly unfinished this game is?
Right after installing 1.3, I checked my bank balance and it was no different than before 1.3, just like 1.2 and 1.1 made no difference. I don't understand how a company that claims to want to give its customers enjoyable, quality entertainment products can sell a game like SH4 without making all their customers millionaires!
How the frack is anyone supposed to fully enjoy this game if they have to work for a living?! That's a good 8 hours every single weekday that I have to spend at work instead of stalking Jap convoys, all because Ubisoft couldn't be bothered releasing a finished product which contains everything one needs to get maximum enjoyment from it. Many times during the week I don't have time to play this game AT ALL! How am I supposed to fully appreciate the tension of being hunted, the adrenaline rush of being depth charged, the thrill of seeing (or hearing) your fish tear apart their prized tanker or battleship, or the attention to detail if I'm not able to play it constantly?
So please Ubisoft, we NEED a 1.4 patch. They are fully aware that we're only able to play games in our extremely limited spare time, so releasing a game this fun without also giving us the copious amounts of spare time required to be able to fully enjoy it is simply inexcusable.
I DEMAND PATCH 1.4 MILLION DOLLARS!
And each game should come with a sense of humor as good as yours. You have to excuse these people, especially the moderators, who have had to put with people throwing fits and crying because they can't see the periscopes go up and down if they spend their time in the conning tower instead of fighting their boat. Or they're hysterical about seeing the sun through the conning tower or some other detail inconsequential to how the game plays. Frankly, they're understandably a bit punch drunk right now and aren't ready for spot on humor that illustrates the ubsurdity of complaints by using ubsurdity. I can appreciate their position. I loved your post!
I'm with RR: I don't see what people are finding to argue about. nomdeplume's post was brilliantly funny.:rock:
Having missions repeat sometimes is not a bug. It pulls randomly from a list based on date ranges of available missions. If there are 4 zones available in a given time period, then you will get a mission from one of those areas. Within the areas, there can be several missions you might get.
If it worked properly, you could indeed get the same patrol zone a few times. Patrols are some of the more common mission types. If there is a 1 in 30 chance of a particular agent insertion, and you get it 6 times in a row, something is broken, period. Yes it is possible, but it should be very very rare. Many people see this problem, however, it isn't that rare.
tater
PepsiCan
08-02-07, 08:03 PM
I added it to the list in the first post.
harrymanback
08-14-07, 08:24 AM
I really wish two things....
1) Someone could tell me what are all of these critical show stopping bugs that are so capable of twisting so many pairs of panties? There aren't any big showstoppers that are left. The radar being completely useless has been fixed, not to mention an improved interface. The fast/slow torpedo selector resetting bug has been fixed. The AI has been improved so as to not sit around with a thumb up their nose while you torpedo the whole convoy. Wrong. There is the repeating missions bug. The one thats filling up the last 4 pages of this thread. Maybe lay of the <Edited... JCC> for a while, your vision seems to be suffering
2) Why I am on my first career, 4th Submarine (S -37, USS Snapper, USS Drum and now USS Balao), 10th patrol and have never had a repeating mission or been retired?
JCC That’s because you probably actually follow your orders and complete your objectives. As long as I’ve completed my objective and radioed back to base I’ve never been give the same mission twice in a row. As a matter of fact, I’ve never been forced to retire either.
I’m really beginning to wonder if the whole repeating mission/retire bug is due to people not understanding how the game works.
Wow, getting strong pings from a < Edited JCC> ...off my starboard. Please don't insult my intelligence, and everyone else's that has complained about this bug. I am annoyed enough as it is. If you have not had it count yourself lucky.
As for people claiming this bug is a 'feature', do your crews a favour and drown yourself at sea. The devs did not create half a dozen missions in a dozen different locations, just to then send people to the same spot time and time again to do the same thing. That may have happened in real life, but this is a game, which people play to escape from the monotony of life. If I wanted to spend months on end living in boredom, with the threat of death looming over me, I would have joined the Navy, or maybe engaged in a conversation with you.
have a nice day y'all
nomdeplume
08-14-07, 08:43 AM
Charming.
The repeating missions bug is certainly interesting. I've experienced it once, I think, in the months I've been playing SH4, and I only got it a few times in a row. If I get a mission to somewhere I don't want to go, I ignore it. I can understand that it would be annoying, but it's certainly not a show stopper for at least a few "lucky" people. And, there's not much joy to be had in completing missions, anyway; a few hundred extra renoun. It doesn't seem to actually affect anything else, so I see it as more of a suggestion as to where it might be worth going.
On the other hand, I continually receive commendations for my "1 war patrol", despite being on my 3rd or 4th in my current career. There's definitely something warped there. Would be nice if it was fixed, but it's just stupid, not a show-stopper.
John Channing
08-14-07, 02:38 PM
I really wish two things....
1) Someone could tell me what are all of these critical show stopping bugs that are so capable of twisting so many pairs of panties? There aren't any big showstoppers that are left. The radar being completely useless has been fixed, not to mention an improved interface. The fast/slow torpedo selector resetting bug has been fixed. The AI has been improved so as to not sit around with a thumb up their nose while you torpedo the whole convoy. Wrong. There is the repeating missions bug. The one thats filling up the last 4 pages of this thread. Maybe lay of the <Edited... JCC> for a while, your vision seems to be suffering
2) Why I am on my first career, 4th Submarine (S -37, USS Snapper, USS Drum and now USS Balao), 10th patrol and have never had a repeating mission or been retired?
JCC That’s because you probably actually follow your orders and complete your objectives. As long as I’ve completed my objective and radioed back to base I’ve never been give the same mission twice in a row. As a matter of fact, I’ve never been forced to retire either.
I’m really beginning to wonder if the whole repeating mission/retire bug is due to people not understanding how the game works.
Wow, getting strong pings from a < Edited JCC> ...off my starboard. Please don't insult my intelligence, and everyone else's that has complained about this bug. I am annoyed enough as it is. If you have not had it count yourself lucky.
As for people claiming this bug is a 'feature', do your crews a favour and drown yourself at sea. The devs did not create half a dozen missions in a dozen different locations, just to then send people to the same spot time and time again to do the same thing. That may have happened in real life, but this is a game, which people play to escape from the monotony of life. If I wanted to spend months on end living in boredom, with the threat of death looming over me, I would have joined the Navy, or maybe engaged in a conversation with you.
have a nice day y'all
Well, I guess I can take some time off from my <Edited JCC> and control my <Edited JCC> tendancies to direct you to this thread.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=621305&posted=1#post621305
As far as the rest of your comments go please check your PMs.
Thanks
JCC
Rockin Robbins
08-14-07, 08:16 PM
And isn't that smoking spot on the wharf where harrymanback (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=231951) was standing just a few seconds ago?:rock:
harrymanback
08-15-07, 09:33 AM
thanks for the link John Channing (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=210054), however, I've had it with this game and am retiring from the Pacific.
I wish you good hunting
PS my comments on nightmares post were entirely accurate, if a little fruity
AVGWarhawk
08-15-07, 09:41 AM
Sorry to say Harry, my experiences are much the same. Complete the mission assigned and move on. The only time I get a repeat is the time I do not complete the objective. I have yet to be retired. Odd as it sounds, doing what is asked to keep going just might be as simple as that and not a bug. Attempt another patrol, complete all the mission as asked. See how it goes. No reason to get upset with John, these are his observations on the matter. Very much the same for me. <shrug>
Rockin Robbins
08-15-07, 07:36 PM
In order to qualify as a submariner extensive psychological testing was done to ensure that the men selected were team players, had long frustration fuses, could work well with others under impossible stress and would not panic in life-endangering situations.
I think harrymanback just washed out of sub school. Back to getting sloshed around in a tin can!
Elder-Pirate
08-15-07, 10:53 PM
I have to admit that John Channing and AVGWarhawk were speaking the facts. I right now am on my 3rd patrol according to Command ( 6 by my score ) scouring the seas for the "Rising Sun". A few times ( like three, that's why my patrols and Commands differ ) I did not the beckoning of Command and came home limping and once my draft was 26 feet in calm seas with holes and leaks everywhere. Although I did not complete those three missions I had like 3500 & 5500 tonnes or so on the books of those runs to show Command and they said they would fix my boat 100%, give me torps, ammo and Provisions "BUT" you will have to redo the same mission again. So off I went, completed the mission and walla next mission was different.
Bottom line: Do what you are told to do and you will be pleased. :up: And so will Command. :rotfl:
My experience is much the same. Sink stuff. Fulfill assigned missions and call in, report convoys, return when empty of torps when base calls me back. Although I've been assigned to patrol the same area again, the missions and sub-missions when reporting in were different. No retirement yet spanning three years. I tend to favor returning to base more frequently than most others seem to do as long as I have a decent tonnage. I like to get the crew and equipment upgrades.
-Pv-
Amiral Crapaud
08-16-07, 05:58 AM
Actually, I do not know if you people would follow me on this (please do not throw rocks yet :D) but I'd be ready to pay some additionnal bucks if this is really the only way to have a clean bug-eradicated SH IV (but then it has to be THE patch) - something that would fix everything the modders can't do (aka mainly every issue related to coding).
Sailor Steve
08-16-07, 10:50 AM
I don't think anyone's going to throw rocks. I paid for SH1; I paid for Patrol Disk 1; I paid for the Patrol Disk 1; and I paid for SHCE, which was the same game with the patrol disks added in, plus a third one.
If they came out with an upgraded, fixed SH3 I would gladly pay for it, and the same goes for an SH4 patch/expansion, as long as, as you said, it fixed EVERYTHING!:sunny:
Marka Ragnos
08-16-07, 11:02 AM
repeating missions....tell me about it i had the same mission for 7 times in a row.
I completed the mission like it should be i even received new missions.
It was almost 1947 when i gave up it was a constant loop :(
I had medals man you couldnt believe it, i could start a garage sale or something :)
The mission was patrolling the luuzon strait or something like that.
Oh well modifications2win :)
AVGWarhawk
08-16-07, 02:26 PM
repeating missions....tell me about it i had the same mission for 7 times in a row.
I completed the mission like it should be i even received new missions.
It was almost 1947 when i gave up it was a constant loop :(
I had medals man you couldnt believe it, i could start a garage sale or something :)
The mission was patrolling the luuzon strait or something like that.
Oh well modifications2win :)
1947????:o
John Channing
08-16-07, 03:11 PM
Something not right there for sure.
JCC
Rockin Robbins
08-16-07, 03:22 PM
I don't think anyone's going to throw rocks. I paid for SH1; I paid for Patrol Disk 1; I paid for the Patrol Disk 1; and I paid for SHCE, which was the same game with the patrol disks added in, plus a third one.
If they came out with an upgraded, fixed SH3 I would gladly pay for it, and the same goes for an SH4 patch/expansion, as long as, as you said, it fixed EVERYTHING!:sunny:
Arrrrrrr! What he said! And if they throw in some cool missions and a little eye candy (I'm easily amused) like upgrading SH3 graphics to SH4 levels and some snazzy sub paint jobs (not copied from Subsim:rotfl:) I'll dance a jig and pay for the privilege with a grin.:arrgh!:
Elder-Pirate
08-16-07, 03:43 PM
@Marka Ragnos
HMmmm, In 1947 there were no Japanese ships to be sunk unless you were willing to have a HUGE Courts martial. On Aug. 14th 1945 Unconditional Surrender of Japanese Forces. Also Aug. 15th 1945 "Victory over Japan ( VJ ) Day".
I don't think the SH4 Devs coded your Sub loafing off the Japanese coast fishing and sunbathing because that's about all that was left in 1947.
@Marka Ragnos
HMmmm, In 1947 there were no Japanese ships to be sunk unless you were willing to have a HUGE Courts martial. On Aug. 14th 1945 Unconditional Surrender of Japanese Forces. Also Aug. 15th 1945 "Victory over Japan ( VJ ) Day".
I don't think the SH4 Devs coded your Sub loafing off the Japanese coast fishing and sunbathing because that's about all that was left in 1947.
Maybe it's different on HARD mode?
Elder-Pirate
08-16-07, 05:03 PM
@Marka Ragnos
HMmmm, In 1947 there were no Japanese ships to be sunk unless you were willing to have a HUGE Courts martial. On Aug. 14th 1945 Unconditional Surrender of Japanese Forces. Also Aug. 15th 1945 "Victory over Japan ( VJ ) Day".
I don't think the SH4 Devs coded your Sub loafing off the Japanese coast fishing and sunbathing because that's about all that was left in 1947.
Maybe it's different on HARD mode?
Doubt that made any difference Caseck but I am about to find out some answers.( I hope ). Check here when someone gives the correct answer. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=120522
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.