SH5, shorter and more simplified than ever before?

[Paul Riley]

Hi guys.

Its been a while since I last used the forums but after recieving an email (interview with UbiSoft devs) from Neal something instantly grabbed my attention.I read that there will only be the type VII and all its variants available? Then after reading the email I decided to watch some footage on YouTube,then read some of the comments below the video and someone mentioned that the game also ends in 1943?If this is the case then that is quite sad really,as the IX and XXI UBoats were a lot of fun to use in SH3,and being able to sink ships right up to 1945 also made the game last longer and helped to make the game more tense,as the odds for survival were hugely against you!.
Its a shame lately that a lot of companies are only emphasizing on the graphics and not paying enough attention to the detail of the actual game,leading to a lot of rushed and unfinished games in some cases.But having said that UbiSoft are a fantastic company and have made some memorable titles and I can't imagine them resorting to such half hearted efforts.

Can anyone shed any light on these 2 points?
Thanks a lot.

Paul Riley

[Nimmo55]

Well Paul, you're really stepping into one huge debate going on the months leading up to the release. Bottom Line: no one really knows for sure what SH5 is going to be like. That in of itself is causing speculation...the lack of certaintity on some aresa that hardcore sub simmers consider very important...realism, campaign, substantive depth in the simulation, not just eye candy. The key issue that is being speculated about is whether the developers of SH5 have decided to aim for a much broader (read casual) audience with SH5...which in of itself, is not the problem. The suspicion (and I stress that this is only a suspicion...) is that they have dumbed the title down...made it easier for non hardcore players to get into the game. And that they have focussed on the look of the thing (to catch the eye of the casual gamer) at the expense of the substantive gameplay. There was the infamous 'periscope screen' in which a supposed screen from an advanced build of the game was posted...and it really set hares and speculation off and running..as it was truly terrible...cartoony, very basic and like some arcade shooter. (They seem to have done away with the realistic SH3 firing buttons and such..now more stylised than an accurate depiction of a real U boat firing apparatus...which is one of the things that got people wondering...) But we are told it was just a beta and not the final thing...and there seem to be other screenshots around which show a more advanced screen (but still not accurate, unfortunately...) (I hope this is so...) A lot of people are annoyed at the game finishing in 1943..that seems to be true....and the fact that some types of subs won't be simulated...cutting down on the choice of sub. (I for one don't care; if it means they put more effort into getting one right, then give me only one choice...I'll live with that. I say far better a 'study sim' than a 'survey sim' anytime!) There is also some murmouring about whether the campaign is truly dynamic such as SH3, but I can't see anything definitive that suggests it is not. There are many threads and a recent interview Neal did with the lead developer that you can trawl through and make up your own mind. But I guess we are just going to have to wait and see...I keep reminding myself that drawing hard and fast conclusions on the basis of little snippets now and then is probably misleading. I truly hope so.

Nimmo55 :hmmm:

[Paul Riley]

I forgot,sorry to ask what has probably already been answered its just been a while since I last visited SubSim,and am somewhat out of touch.

PR

[timmyab]

I'd be quite happy to play with just a type VII as long as it's highly detailed and fully controllable. As for sinking ships into 1945, the reality was completely different.By 1944 the odds weren't just against you, it was suicide.With the game now ending in 1943, hopefully surviving until then will become much more difficult than it was in sh3 which will be more realistic. As for the point about graphics trumping gameplay, I agree totally, which is why I've stopped buying computer games.Here's hoping SH5 will be different.

[THE_MASK]

SH5 is not like SH3/4. They want SH5 to be an acurate portrayal of how life was like on a uboat so they have interactive crew , full interior of the sub . Think Das Boot and you get the picture . They said depending how SH5 sells , we might get add ons etc .

[sk065]

I dont want a story driven campaign - id rather have random. You dont know what to expect and I think thats were the SH3 replay value comes from.

As for a crew (or cast) of characters - I can see this becoming stale very quickly. There is only so much story driven dialogue that will get repeated and repeated regardless of how dynamic the campaign is.

Id rather have the crew respond to orders only.

[Paul Riley]

Thanks for the replies.Guess all we can do is wait,one thing that DOES sound promising though is the addition of frozen decks in icy seas,and the possibility of racing through blizzard conditions?.That will DEF add to the realism,as my old favourite haunts in SH3 were the Arctic routes and through the Denmark Strait.
Really hope they finally include some of the other bigger and more advanced UBoats,but probably not,as the VII was most widely used and the XXI was a late war weapon *sigh*

Cheers guys,appreciate it.

[Lorient Bunker]

Well I for one don't mind the mid 1943 ending for the following reason, and that is because all my Grand Campaigns in SH3 always ended up getting corrupted before I'd reached that far anyway!

For example I just recently had to abandon many months of off/on progress of a Grand Campaign in mid-mission during Nov 1941. A problem which affected the whole game not just campaigns and forced me to completely re-install.

My view is that so long this is just the start and we have DLC or add-ons to follow I'll be quite happy with this to begin with. But all those who have said they won't get the game because it doesn't have IX or XXI boats etc from the beginning need to consider this, that if sales are poor then the chances are that no DLC or add-ons will ever appear.

[Lanzfeld]

Why is this a sticky?

[Kapitanleutnant]

I don't know, but remove the question mark from the title and it's a pretty good summing up of the game as it stands.

[Iron Budokan]

There's only so many times a guy can offer you soup before it becomes dull.

[Jimbuna]

All will be revealed in March http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

[AVGWarhawk]

I believe all will find the game just cheeky. :yeah:

[Letum]

Why is this a sticky?

Because it's a well written and polite expression of the fears and
grievances that many people here have. These issues are the most
important to the vast majority of SH fans at the moment. A sticky post
is very appropriate.

[Onkel Neal]

I don't know, but remove the question mark from the title and it's a pretty good summing up of the game as it stands.


Well, considering no one has played the game, that's hard to say. Maybe you mean "it's a pretty good summing up of what everyone thinks the game will be".

[IanC]

Well, considering no one has played the game, that's hard to say. Maybe you mean "it's a pretty good summing up of what everyone thinks the game will be".

:yep: You can go copy and paste that answer in many threads going on right now.

[MRV]

Ok, I posted so much about distrust in publishers and SH5 being the ultimative CoD-style "nerd exploitation" the way its done with games like Star Trek Online. "Just post a beautiful screenshot of a ship in the internet and enough geeks are going to buy the game" I won't repeat this now.

I still don't get it how they want to include all these RPG-elements with crew storytelling into a dynamic campaign...If, based on a dynamic choice, I get strafed by a hurricane, my watchman is dead, there goes his story....

My new (old) hope after all this is, like I think I said with SH3 before, the merged install option like in IL 2 Sturmovik. Although I think what were "patches" in IL2 will be "DLC" by now.

Maddox Software started with 3 static campaigns and a few planes, but they were very accurately modeled for the time. Although it had its limitations it definitely was a true SIMULATION with all/most realism switched on.

after a few patches with brought us a few more aircraft to choose from, there was Forgotten Battles, with new dynamic campaigns (pretty limited because it was around 2003 i think.) and even more planes, including heavy bombers.

It went on and went on, with Pacific Fighters it included the PTO, right now with IL2 1946 version 4.09m we have an almost complete simulation of WW2 air warfare, graphics were improved with each version so even if the engine is outdated by now it still does not feel and look that way. Additionally there is a modding community, maybe a bit smaller than with SH3, but very active and creative. Someone even programmed an improved dynamic campaign generator.

Thats what I hope for in SH 5 now, original game being basic release, patches adding type II and later Type IX, an addon "the last battles" covering the struggle for survival from 1943 on. Later new bases added and with the next release "Pacific Subs" and the next addon is maybe "Destroyer Command 2"

how about this ubisoft?

[Kapitanleutnant]

Maybe you mean "it's a pretty good summing up of what everyone thinks the game will be".

I stand corrected. :salute:

[TDK1044]

Personally, the VII has always been my preferred sub, so selfishly I have no problem with that being the featured sub in the game. As for the career ending in May 1943......not by the time Lurker has finished with it it won't.

I'm more concerned with things like AA, AF, Dynamic Shadows, cloud textures, water look and texture, does the sub feel like it's stuck on rails, will there be realistic rain/sleet effects etc. :)

[paxhispanica]

I think that this game is comprised of several parts. All of them important, but everyone has his prefered ones:

+Eye candy graphics (shadows, AA,...)
+Good enviroment (rough seas, high waves, Storms,...)
+Simulation (to be able to operate the TDC, to have the possibility of draw an attack solution (having good instruments e. g. a good ruler) and to be able to make annotations on the chart, to have the possibility of operating the engines (only electrical at surface, or both), etc...
+Accurate anti submarine warfare (RAF Coastal command with Leigh Lights, destroyers with limited depth charges,...)
+Good water dynamics (currents displacing your sub, dynamic thermal layers, etc ...
+ A real campaign (not a RAMBO like campaign (my sub against the Royal Navy)

If the improvements on SHV are only related to walk and talk with my crew, then Ubisoft will have a curious "surprise".

[Snestorm]

I'm more concerned with things like AA, AF, Dynamic Shadows, cloud textures, water look and texture, does the sub feel like it's stuck on rails, will there be realistic rain/sleet effects etc. :)

My opposite, as this is exactly the stuff I don't worry about.
To each is own.

I want my IXs, and the rest of the war.

[SteamWake]

Why is this a sticky?

Good question... :-?

[Dallas]

I think Ubi is playing it safe. If the investment in SH5 and the Type VII go well, then I see add on's with other types coming forth and probably a sequel to cover the later half of the war. Maybe even see a Seehund. At any rate, I will get the Sim. I do look forward to the updated graphics and the ability to interact with the crew and see all of the sub.

[Deep Source]

VII type only? 1943 end? XXI Century HUD? OK

Three words for UBI.

RELEASE A SDK PLEASE.

Fligth Simulator have a SDK.
Trainz Simulator 2009 have a world builder.
The Sims 3 have a world builder (soon a "sim creator").

But Silent Hunter have a misery "campaing layer editor".

The silent hunter modder's are a good people. But not god's. These guy's needs tools.

Thanks for mod's GWX TEAM, Luker, Decimus, thanks to all.

[jdkbph]

As for a crew (or cast) of characters - I can see this becoming stale very quickly. There is only so much story driven dialogue that will get repeated and repeated regardless of how dynamic the campaign is..

Yeah, there's a reason why no one reads books any more... movies are only 2 hours long. Hope against hope that this reason is not the driving force behind UBI's "re-imagined" sub sim, aka SH5.

JD

[THE_MASK]

SH5 , more complex than SH3 with 160 ports etc .

[Kptlt_Lynch]

Not quite sure whats going on over there at UBI.

While I'm impressed with some of the additions they have made to the 'sim' there are some blaring shortcommings to SH5.

Lets get over all this talk about 'well, we havn't played it'. Well, played or not.. who is the genious over there that decided the war for the U-Boats ends in 1943? And.... errr, why does he still have a job? And who agreed to this?

SH3 with some mod enhancements became quite a fantastic experience. A FULL experience. Half the enjoyment was dealing with new Allied technology that, as time progressed, so did the challenge. Surviving in the later years was difficult at best, but those encounters that had you on the edge of your seat for 5-18 hours resulting in survival and a return to port with a smashed up boat were exhilerating.

So we have half a war.

The focus on just the type VII (personally all I use, but still) is another blatant brain fart. We are looking for a U-Boat Sim, played in a Simulated war... I'm sure the entire community can vouch for that. Omitting the Type IX, at the very least is irresponsible, never mind all the other sub types.

Like really.... who comes up with these ideas?

This had so much premise, until they turned it into Diet Silent Hunter V - Half the War, even less Submarines.

Dissapointed.

[Rykaird]

Has anyone seen a screenshot of the TDC yet? My biggest concern is that the "thing" in the periscope IS the TDC.

One of the immersion factors in SH3 that was diluted for me in SH4 was the ability to directly control the equipment through the switches, knobs, and toggles on the equipment itself, rather than through a virtual interface.

I'm hoping the screenshot of the torpedo interface in the video walkthrough is the "simplified" interface for folks on lower realism settings.

[Highbury]

The focus on just the type VII (personally all I use, but still) is another blatant brain fart. We are looking for a U-Boat Sim

Alot of true simulators deal with only one vehicle. It is just games that get labeled as simulators (read: IL-2) that make people think a dev team can accurately simulate 40+ vehicles in a cost effective and timely manner. Sure we are talking a much smaller number then IL-2 but you can be sure alot more goes into building a full Type VII then one of Oleg's egg-shell plane models. DCS Black Shark is hailed as one of the best sims out for flight, and it has one vehicle. I have never heard complaints about that... maybe because that one vehicle is in the name... perhaps Ubi should have titled this "U-Boot Type VII: Silent Hunter V" lol

I will be very sad with no Type IIs (I have twice survived the war in them, and used nothing but IIs and VIIb's in SH3 or SH4 ATO mods.. I am a sucker for the early crap) but I can see the sense in focusing on one sub, considering they are supposed to be recreating the whole interior, I think focusing on one is a good plan, do the rest as add-ons.

As for the war ending in '43... makes no sense to me, but I am sure at some point they sat down made a decision on it. You can bet it was a weighing of pros and cons. Unless I know what was on the list for pros and cons then I can't really call it a stupid decision, just an unfortunate one. If the game really has "story" perhaps there is just so damn much of it that they can't write it all before Dec 2010 lol.. that is just speculating but there are many possible reasons.

[Ishigami]

I don’t think that flight simulators are good role model for naval simulations.
Just take a look at some of the really good flight simulators out there like the PMDG 747-400, MD-11 or LevelD 767 and you just have to admit the difference in depth and accuracy compared to Silent Hunter submarines or ships from Ship Simulator.
That said a KptLt probably never operated e.g. diving rudder himself so why should the player?
I’m willingly to give up on the idea to operate everything myself but I want at least a good imitation of the performance and behavior like it is done for the cars in Gran Turismo.
With that I could have fun to compute target solutions, to intercept convoys or evading escorts rather than operating the systems themselves given that the AI and environment behave realistically.
So I rather have detailed ocean layers and damage models, realistic AI behavior, drifts, waves and stuff like that instead of e.g. useable vents in the command room.
However UbiSoft made the first mistake regarding this by using a cylindrical world instead of a spherical one. Leading me to believe that SH5 is still going for the eye candy instead of fixing some of the “broken” gameplay elements of its predecessors.

[TDK1044]

I believe that Silent Hunter 5 will be a better game than many are giving it credit for. I think though that there is a big disconnect between the Development studio in Bucharest and the Sales and Marketing guys in Montreuil sous Bois, France.

[AVGWarhawk]

There is no doubt in my mind that SH5 will have a much different take than SH3/4. I see a much more deeper roll as a captain than the others previous would allow. :yeah:

[McBeck]

There is no doubt in my mind that SH5 will have a much different take than SH3/4. I see a much more deeper roll as a captain than the others previous would allow. :yeah:Thats my hope as well.

I dont mind the campaign ending in 43, if the experience is just as long as SH3.

I look forward to the new campaign style :D

The first thing I will try is to shadow a convoy and wait for the other subs to join :D

[Silanda]

Just a thought about all this bitching regarding SH5, do a lot of you guys have short memories? Do you remember how SH3 was when it shipped, without any mods? No realistic method of manual targeting, unrealistic ship damage, too easy, empty ports, etc. You are ripping into a game that you haven't even played but you're not even doing that fairly, you are judging it based on a heavily modded SH3 and not the stock game.

SH3 wasn't always the game that it eventually became, would it be too hard to give SH5 a chance?

[swampa]

I have been away for a time' sorry if this as been said elsewhere . Reading the news about SH5 :hmmm:. Dumbed down and early finish don't sound good. Can only be answerd when the game comes out. If it is true just hope that the mods can do the business to the game that every one wants

[Snestorm]

Just a thought about all this bitching regarding SH5, do a lot of you guys have short memories? Do you remember how SH3 was when it shipped, without any mods? No realistic method of manual targeting, unrealistic ship damage, too easy, empty ports, etc. You are ripping into a game that you haven't even played but you're not even doing that fairly, you are judging it based on a heavily modded SH3 and not the stock game.

SH3 wasn't always the game that it eventually became, would it be too hard to give SH5 a chance?

My SH3 is NOT heavily modded, and I don't see SH5 as even being in the same league.

How can anyone put their confidense in future add-ons, when the faults of SH3 AND SH4 haven't even been corrected yet?

Reputation and Past Performance count

[TDK1044]

For me, the key is how modable it is. If Ubisoft produces a game that is actively targeted at the casual gamer rather than the subsimmer, then that's fine.... as long as it can be heavily modded for those of us wanting a sim rather than an arcade experience.

Looking at the marketing and available images so far, I wouldn't be surprised if the stock game is not exactly what we were hoping for.
That may not be the way that things should be, but that's the way it was with SHIII and SHIV.

I think we should support subsim by ordering the game here, and then get all our screaming and foot stamping out of the way in the first week after it's released.

Then we can set about modding it.:)

[McBeck]

The have stated SHV should be even more moddable than any previous version.

[kvbrock82]

Hi guys.

Its a shame lately that a lot of companies are only emphasizing on the graphics and not paying enough attention to the detail of the actual game,leading to a lot of rushed and unfinished games in some cases.But having said that UbiSoft are a fantastic company and have made some memorable titles and I can't imagine them resorting to such half hearted efforts.

Paul Riley

Assassins creed 1 and Far cry 2 would be perfect examples of ubi taking severe shortcuts in gameplay while amping up the orgasmic graphics.. Since i bought Far Cry 2 I swore to myself that i will never buy another ubisoft game without trying it before. Never believe the hype.

[Frederf]

Reading the Jan2010 Subsim SH5 interview was the first information I had read on SH5 in a long, long time. My first reaction to some of the information was initially negative but thinking a 2nd or 3rd time about it made me really pleased.

First this whole "shorter" thing. The OP seems to equate the shortness of the game with the shortness period of time the game is about. This is a misguided idea. The game can be as long as it likes (well I guess up to a 1:1 ratio with real time but that's 3-4 years in the case of 1936 to 1939) with a shortened period of the war.

The developer interviewed reminds us that the latter years of the war involved a lot of tactics and technologies that were really poorly modeled (or not at all) in SH3 and SH4. Why bother making a 8 year game if the latter 4 years are going to diverge so sharply from reality? Would it not be better to focus on a subset of that time and do it better?

Personally, my enjoyment from Silent Hunter comes from the feeling of "being there" and connection to the boat, crew, tactical situation, and environment. The breadth or even specific focus of the game takes a distant back seat to its quality or depth. I would much rather play a really, really well-made sim of a Dutch submarine in the Asiatic than a mediocre sim of the RN-USN-KM's entire fleet over the entire globe.

The interview seems to stress that detail and depth are their primary goals as opposed to the "world, skin-deep" approach with SH3 and SH4.

[Alienfresser]

Sad that there won't be no Paukenschlag without the Typ IX boats. :down:
Loved it to cruise around in Carbiean sinking nice little US oilers.

So I guess we will be limited to operations around europe.

At least they implemented the heavy AA guns for the boats (Quad and M42) a seen in the screenshots. But on the other hand, thought that, at least the M42, wasn't ready until late 43 in single and early 44 in double versions.

[looney]

Prabably a dumb observation, but is the SH4 stock US campaign about as short as the 1939-1943 German campaign in SH5?

[bigboywooly]

Prabably a dumb observation, but is the SH4 stock US campaign about as short as the 1939-1943 German campaign in SH5?

It is but only cos the US didnt enter the war till Dec 41
Unfortunately for the Germans the war didnt end in 43

I guess if Ubi were to hint at DLC or addons to extend war/add additional uboats then a lot of ppl would be a lot happier
Me included

[Gilbou]

Assassins creed 1 and Far cry 2 would be perfect examples of ubi taking severe shortcuts in gameplay while amping up the orgasmic graphics.. Since i bought Far Cry 2 I swore to myself that i will never buy another ubisoft game without trying it before. Never believe the hype.

Farcry 2 is not the sequel to Far Cry.

The sequel to Far Cry is Crysis.

Farcry 2 by Ubisoft is just another game with a misleading fake title.
It has nothing to do with Far cry.

You play Farcry. Then Crysis. The first one, and its sequel.

FC2 does not exist. Repeat after me :arrgh!:

[kvbrock82]

Farcry 2 is not the sequel to Far Cry.

The sequel to Far Cry is Crysis.

Farcry 2 by Ubisoft is just another game with a misleading fake title.
It has nothing to do with Far cry.

You play Farcry. Then Crysis. The first one, and its sequel.

FC2 does not exist. Repeat after me :arrgh!:

I get your drift.. I still look at the box of the 'game' and shudder to think the potential that was wasted with that title. I had such high hopes :nope: