Thing i dont expect to see in SH5

[THE_MASK]

I dont expect to see
Rubber banding .
Huge saved files .
Co2 bug .
Crew with no eyes .
Jiggling water .




Could a moderator change the title to Things not Thing , i screwed up.

[JScones]

...the desktop...

[THE_MASK]

Come on Scones , i was being serious .

[JScones]

So was I - seeing the desktop means the game has CTDed. I don't want that. Do you?

[THE_MASK]

Sorry , yeah a bit slow .

[JScones]

That's OK, it's still 1989 in QLD. :rotfl2:

(VTIC - I was born there)

[Ilpalazzo]

Sadly, I AM expecting to see those things. I am hoping I don't see them. Honestly the zombie/ghost/f'ed up crew and jiggly water alone were enough to make me hate SH4. They ruined the whole sh4 having better graphics than sh3 thing. As such, I prefer SH3's polished look and gameplay (especially with mods).

[JScones]

:shifty: Shhh. Ixnay on the SH3nay is better than SH4nay comments. It upsets too many people here who in turn will expect you to uninstall any SH3 mods you have installed just so you can make a "fair" comparison and submit to SH4's superiority. :shifty:

Beyond that, I think you're right. I expect to see CTDs, especially relating to save games. I hope I don't, but, I'm a realist. At the least, I won't be disappointed and indeed will be pleasantly surprised if the devs fix this very deficient aspect of the game. :up:

Speaking of the devs, has anyone seen them around lately? Or have they been gagged by Ubisoft??? :hmmm:

[JU_88]

...the desktop...


ROFL! :haha:

[Ilpalazzo]

I just can't get over seeing a crewman as nothing but a dark silhouette and a pair of evil eyes staring at me. Sh4 was a survival horror in a strange Jello dimension.

I don't expect to find myself being attacked on the surface by enemy warships and planes on a clear day like in the trailer.

I also don't expect to be caught with my pants down because somebody didn't tell me the visibility was so poor. COME ON

[longam]

I don't expect to see
The repair crew waving back and forth on the same nut.
Crew members that are related to Ahnold
Those damn seagulls - at least let me shoot them.

[JU_88]

Quote
I just can't get over seeing a crewman as nothing but a dark silhouette and a pair of evil eyes staring at me. Sh4 was a survival horror in a strange Jello dimension.

SH4 also = Silent HILL 4 :haha:

I don't expect to find myself being attacked on the surface by enemy warships and planes on a clear day like in the trailer.

A trailer is a trailer, I woudnt worry about that at all.

I also don't expect to be caught with my pants down because somebody didn't tell me the visibility was so poor. COME ON

Agree - That would be nice! :up:

[Webster]

Sadly, I AM expecting to see those things. I am hoping I don't see them. Honestly the zombie/ghost/f'ed up crew and jiggly water alone were enough to make me hate SH4. They ruined the whole sh4 having better graphics than sh3 thing. As such, I prefer SH3's polished look and gameplay (especially with mods).


i agree, it wou;d be nice if they could make it work better this time

as for the "i dont expect to see", heres a few:

transparent background for scope views (ghost waves in all black backgrounds is emmersion killer)

sniper aiming ability of guns on ships (no way they should be hitting something the size of a conning tower 3 out of 5 shots from that far away?)

destroyers zooming in on me like i have a gps beacon signalling them (except when im really detected that is, not just because a torpedo went off)

[SteamWake]

Wasent the missing eyes things part of a little joke by the developers on folks whom 'hacked' the copy protection?

[Webster]

Beyond that, I think you're right. I expect to see CTDs, especially relating to save games. I hope I don't, but, I'm a realist. At the least, I won't be disappointed and indeed will be pleasantly surprised if the devs fix this very deficient aspect of the game. :up:

Speaking of the devs, has anyone seen them around lately? Or have they been gagged by Ubisoft??? :hmmm:

i havent seen a post from them in a while, must be locked up in the bunker untill its finished lol.

my guess is its just past the point of any chance of meaningfull imput they are accepting.

they did mention the way games are saved is completely new so we can only hope its a better working system.

[scrapser]

I don't expect to see torpedoes levitating above the sea as they find their way to the target. Not that this has ever happened but it would be funny if it did. I think all it would take is a mistakenly missing negative sign in the code that controls run depth to make this happen. It's amazing what a little typo can do to a program.

[Webster]

Wasent the missing eyes things part of a little joke by the developers on folks whom 'hacked' the copy protection?


i believe it was a rendering thing or something like that and i think it was somehow video card related where not all cards were compatable thing.

i always thought it might be from dx10 trying to be incorperated but its purely a guess.

[Webster]

Those damn seagulls - at least let me shoot them.


YES !!! :woot::woot::woot::woot:im all for this one (but just the shooting part, i want to keep the birds, they are agrivating yes but it adds to realism)

[GoldenRivet]

Lasers.

really unrealistic.

[SteamWake]

YES !!! :woot::woot::woot::woot:im all for this one (but just the shooting part, i want to keep the birds, they are agrivating yes but it adds to realism)

Espically when the circle the boat while your at 100 feet :haha:

[Sevrin]

I hope (but don't expect) for better voice-overs. Alvin the chipmunk and the Terminator are not on board.

I don't expect to see stationary targets going from 0 to 60 in .2 seconds.

I don't expect to see ships on collision course suddenly stop and full reverse.

I'd like to able to tab out of the game without it causing the Co2, or silent running bugs.

I don't expect my watch crew to still be standing on the bridge after a dive.

[kiwi_2005]

Ramming your sub into a destroyer and the destroyer sinking while your boat still floats... :har:

[AVGWarhawk]

A fleet boat :cry:

[Webster]

Ramming your sub into a destroyer and the destroyer sinking while your boat still floats... :har:

but i also would note its true in reverse, i dont want to see a DD ram you and not get serious damage to itself

i dont want destroyers acting like the keel is an acceptable weapon to use

[Jimbuna]

Mutual damage inflicted on a destroyer should they ram you.

[Webster]

Mutual damage inflicted on a destroyer should they ram you.
so are you for :up: or against :down: having this in the game? :06:

[mookiemookie]

I don't expect to see milk cows reload you with a full compliment of torpedoes. They just didn't carry enough to fully restock every boat.

[JU_88]

so are you for :up: or against :down: having this in the game? :06:

In Stock SH3 I have actually seen an AI destroyer LOSE versus A-Dummy-Non-AI-Type VII)
the DD sunk itself while trying to ram the sub.... :dead:
Anyone remember Sinking DDs in stock SH3 by slicing their bottom with the Persicope?
You could sink an entire convoy using only the Observation scope as a tin-opener :rotfl2:
No credit mind you....

[Task Force]

I dont expect to see a conpletly finnished game... (but I can hope so, not talking down to the developers! just that I think it is comeing out alittle soon...)

[Webster]

In Stock SH3 I have actually seen an AI destroyer LOSE versus A-Dummy-Non-AI-Type VII)
the DD sunk itself while trying to ram the sub.... :dead:
Anyone remember Sinking DDs in stock SH3 by slicing their bottom with the Persicope?
You could sink an entire convoy using only the Observation scope as a tin-opener :rotfl2:
No credit mind you....


yep, i hated that too but i equally hated the fix they came up with by making titanium hulls where you could use the DD like a hammer and it NEVER got any damage.

it was the same with sh4 as well, all the way up to patch 1.3 untill patch 1.4 turned off damage for ship collisions so now a BB can completely run over a DD and it rolls out from under the hull (and from being halfway submerged in most cases) and then it speeds off like it never happened.

how realistic is it when the prefered attack method used by AI DD is ramming into you first and then use depth charges after.

its always hard to get a uniform opinion as to the extent of damage each should get in these collisions but i feel they should be close to equal damage to each or about 55-60% to the sub and 40-45% to the DD

im sure there could be a formula worked out based on the ships size/displacement

[Rosencrantz]

Wave height suddenly increasing as wind speed increases. Waves need some time to "go up". And the same reversed.


Greetings,
-RC-

[Philipp_Thomsen]

I don't expect to see starforce or any stupid protection device. Piracy exists and won't ever stop existing, its impossible. When it comes to software, anything that can be done, can't be undone, so don't waste time on it.

I don't expect to have the necessity to have my dvd on my drive to get the game running.

[JU_88]

I don't expect to have the necessity to have my dvd on my drive to get the game running.


^This :up:
I think we might be in luck here - judging by SHV and the way things are going in general.

[Jimbuna]

so are you for :up: or against :down: having this in the game? :06:

Oh I'm definitely for http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

There are instances where a DD lost a propellor or a rudder and were totally disabled as a result of ramming U-boats.

I don't see why they should be able to attack you with impunity.....that was never the case in RL.

[Snestorm]

but i also would note its true in reverse, i dont want to see a DD ram you and not get serious damage to itself

i dont want destroyers acting like the keel is an acceptable weapon to use

Except for the DEs that had their bows specialy built for ramming submarines. That doesn't mean they were immune from damage, they just had a better bumper. By any name, including ramming, it's still a collision at sea. Not a good thing.

[V.C. Sniper]

crappy torpedo wakes

[THE_MASK]

Actually i dont expeect to see any old problems because they said it is a brand new game . I hope not to see any new problems though .

[Ilpalazzo]

In Stock SH3 I have actually seen an AI destroyer LOSE versus A-Dummy-Non-AI-Type VII)
the DD sunk itself while trying to ram the sub.... :dead:
Anyone remember Sinking DDs in stock SH3 by slicing their bottom with the Persicope?
You could sink an entire convoy using only the Observation scope as a tin-opener :rotfl2:
No credit mind you....

hah, I remember that. Haven't seen it in a long while. I still remember the first time I noticed it. I was playing some sort of single mission where you attack a task force. I was in the thick of it and accidentally found out that if I kept the scope up and stayed at periscope depth, they would all disembowel themselves on the damned thing. At first I was just confused as to why they kept sinking. When I realized what was happening, I abused the hell out of it and sank every one of them. It was hilarious.:har::nope:

I don't expect to see a nice shiny sun halo. I could never get that frigging effect to work in the previous games. I think anti aliasing made it not work with my nvidia card. And it just plain didn't work on my ati card.

[Philipp_Thomsen]

I don't expect to see the uboat interior as a brand new, super-clean, spacey iron coffin.

I spent all day seeing footage and hearing uboat skippers talk about the uboat interior. They said (and showed footage) that it was VERY dirty and stinky and tiny, a very disgraceful place to be.

I expect to see that in Sh5.

[JU_88]

I dont expect to open my SHV box to find some left over bacon and and a used kleenex inside. :oops:
SHV special 'credit crunch' edition. :woot:

[Task Force]

I dont expect to open my SHV box to find some left over bacon and and a used kleenex inside. :oops:
SHV special 'credit crunch' edition. :woot:

Thats just a extra...:rotfl2:

(SHV The breakfast edition!)