Should the devs be blamed ?

[Uber Gruber]

The subsim members who met the devs were told of the excellent SH5 in development. Surely that version of SH5 must still be in development because the monkey UBI released last week is, well, anything but.

Should we now conclude that the integrity of the devs has been compromised ? If not then perhaps the devs would like to present their case here in this topic ?

As a life long developer myself (no pun intended) I sympathise greatly with the often illogical demands placed on developers by management. But I find it increasingly difficult to defend them based on their pro-SH5 postings to date.

So devs, please feel free to explain to this small floppy community why you should not have a slice of blame for this distasterous iteration of the sinking SH series ? Please help us to maintain subsims unequivical support of you and your work.

Thanks:salute:

[TDK1044]

I think Ubisoft the Publisher made a decision to change the demographic that the game would be targeted at. The Devs are employed by Ubisoft and they have to do as they are told.

Also, In their defence, I think the game is only as modable as it is because the Devs knew that subsimmers would need an increased level of modability in order to make the game playable as a sim. :)

[goldorak]

I think Ubisoft the Publisher made a decision to change the demographic that the game would be targeted at. The Devs are employed by Ubisoft and they have to do as they are told.


Spot on. If blame there is, it must be layed on Ubisofts feet.
Have at look at what happened to the top 2 executives of Infinity Ward for disagreeing against the wishes of their publisher Activision (and this is after they developed the most succesful episode of MW ever, 2-3 billion $ for Activision).


Also, In their defence, I think the game is only as modable as it is because the Devs knew that subsimmers would need an increased level of modability in order to make the game playable as a sim. :)

Yeah, at least they gave the community an exit to mod the game. Not that this should be an excuse, but at least its better than having everything taken away from players control such as in the MW2 case.

[malkuth74]

You got to connect the dots... Yeah maybe UBI rushed them a little bit.. And thats why we have this.

But the fact that simple things Like the PDF manual have no useful information in the game at all... A PDF manual.. You use PDF manual to save money and to make it a bigger more information packed manual... But not in this case.

In game information NONE. You don't know whats going on, you don't know when they switch you base around. You don't know when you get medals, you don't know when your crew gets upgrade points. You don't know anytghing.

And the lack of response from them tells me that they might either be ashamed of this fact... Or hopefully hard at work trying to fix it.

[Gunnodayak]

Some of you already know my opinion about this matter, so I won't state it again, especially considering that I've decided not to fire direct and specific poisoned arrows against them anymore, even if they fully deserve that.

[cherbert]

And the lack of response from them tells me that they might either be ashamed of this fact... Or hopefully hard at work trying to fix it.

They have responded.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1292441&postcount=20

[Onkel Neal]

The subsim members who met the devs were told of the excellent SH5 in development. Surely that version of SH5 must still be in development because the monkey UBI released last week is, well, anything but.

Should we now conclude that the integrity of the devs has been compromised ? If not then perhaps the devs would like to present their case here in this topic ?

As a life long developer myself (no pun intended) I sympathise greatly with the often illogical demands placed on developers by management. But I find it increasingly difficult to defend them based on their pro-SH5 postings to date.

So devs, please feel free to explain to this small floppy community why you should not have a slice of blame for this distasterous iteration of the sinking SH series ? Please help us to maintain subsims unequivical support of you and your work.

Thanks:salute:

Sorry, man, but you loaded your post with a lot of assumptions and misleading statements. First, you are wrong about The subsim members who met the devs were told of the excellent SH5 in development. No, we were not told of the excellent development, we were shown a demo. There were no proclamations of "excellent development", that is your phrase, and you weren't there.

Next, you have a lovely "When did you stop beating your wife?" bit about their integrity. Please, man, what's wrong with you? Integrity? Are these guys attorneys or accounting auditors? That's completely out of line. Now they must respond or their integrity is in question?

Look, maybe you are umaware but the dev team for SH (as many other industry dev teams) are not supposed to jump on every forum and reply to every critic. Maybe you want to post this type of question on the corporate forum.

Neal

[Onkel Neal]

I'm opening this thread back up in case you want to reply, call me an appeaser, etc.

[Jeevz]

It looks to me like their ambitions were more than a little outside their deadline or budget or both. Do I blame them for trying to make an innovative new iteration in the SH series? No, I'm happy some developer is out there still making sub sims and at least trying to go bigger and better with each new entry, however, I do wish that they had spent some of the available time/budget in different areas. I also can't understand how the morale bug didn't get fixed in the 0 day patch, that's got to be the most game breaking bug in SH5 right now.

The previous games got a pretty good number of patches (more than most on the market these days) so I'm hopeful that most of the major problems will get solved and I'm sure the community will make alterations and mods that turn it into a completely new game just like the last 2.

[TDK1044]

The history of the Silent Hunter franchise has taught me that buying a game in the Silent Hunter series is actually an investment. If you pay your $49 up front prior to the release of the game, then you must realize that you won't see a pay off for at least 6 to 12 months.

People are always pulled in by the allure of the new game, screenshots, videos etc. Been there, done that. This time I wised up.

I'll wait for this buggy arcade game to be fully patched and heavily modded. :)

[jdkbph]

I'm not one to defend publishers or developers (I'm an IT change, release and configuration manager... and if you know what that is you can probably guess what my opinion of a typical application developer might be :)), but as I said in another thread, what we're looking at here is the result of prioritizing against a deadline. For all we know, the devs were working right up until the 11th hour squashing crash bugs and the like... things that would have rendered the game literally unplayable (as opposed to the complaints I've read here that have been so characterized). What's left was probably categorized as manageable "post deployment".

I've also mentioned here before that, IMHO, we - the type of sub sim enthusiasts that hang out in forums like this and discuss things like conning tower railing placement and contour - obviously are not the target audience for this game. A strategic decision made far above the level of the developers, I'm sure.

Once we're willing to accept that, I think it will be a lot easier for us to swallow some of the "questionable" design decisions that were made here and move on.

As someone pointed out up-thread, I think we should be at least somewhat grateful that UBI left us an out... the ability to mod the game. They did NOT have to do that. The ability to mod a game is not a given, or some kind of right.

Anyone who has played Oblivion or Fallout 3, and enjoyed the mods avalable for those games, was probably very disappointed, like I was, to find that Mass Effect 1 and 2 were not at all mod-able.

Another example of a game system that would benefit greatly through modding is Distant Guns and Jutland. However, the developer/publisher of those games, through either greed, ignorance or obstinancy (I suspect all three) chose to take active measures to prevent this.

That could very well have happened here, with SH5, as well. I'm sure the suits at UBI must have realized that at least some of what will be modded into SH5 (as with previous iterations in the series) could be easily produced in house, then bundled and sold through their U-Pay system. It wouldn't surprise me at all to hear that they had to be talked out of it. Now who could have done that, and why?

All speculation, sure, but I think it's far more likely than the alternative some of us tend to jump to directly - that the devs are evil, stupid or incompetent.

For myself, I would be all over this game - warts, arcade elements and all - if it weren't for the DRM. Now THAT is evil and stupid! :doh:

JD

[BigBANGtheory]

I think the devs should look at how Egosoft handle these types of issues, basically involving and communicating effectively with their community.

They should also learn for GSC on how not to do it, which is basically release a patch without notice and leaving its community wondering where they stand and what they can expect.

[AVGWarhawk]

In the days of nintendo, every game worked.



:har: I understand what you are saying Bishop. However, Donkey Kong is a bit different then what we are playing these days. That does not make it any better though. Take a deep breath. You seem very hot under the collar. You keep harping on SH4 multiplay. IMO multiply in SH series is drab at best. I played it a few times. It turned into craziness. Mutliplay for me is flight sims and Call of Duty. Submarines? Not so much.

[gamingdave]

The Devs really didnt promise what some people here think they did.

If the devs produced the game some people want, it would have only sold a handful of copies.

Despite what a lot of you may think, a lot of the things that make it an accurate sim, also make it a dull "game". Ubisoft make games, they have to be fun, and like it or not, they have to appeal to more than a very small group of people. One of the most succesfull franchises of all time, Gran Turismo, claims to be "The Real Driving Simulator". Clearly it is not though, if it was nearly every player would get in their F50, and spin off on the first corner. It has its routes in simulation, but has to bend things a bit to make them fun.

I have to admit, as much as I love the SH series, I have always been a fairweather player, always playing on easier rather than harder settings. What I love is that there is the posibility to do this still. Sure the interface has changed quite dramaticly, but for the vast majority of people who will buy and play SHV (who will never ever come to this site) it has improved for the better, giving them a better gameplay experience.

The devs will have known full well about the hardcore over here, and have built the game so it can be modded. In only a couple of days we already have most of the SH4 interface back in!

As shocking as it may seem to some people, the average long time (high post count) member here ISNT the target audience as far as Ubisoft is concerned. You should be very thankfull that whilst the publisher moves the game in one direction, the developers make it so easy for the very small, but very passionate few, to have the game they want. Therefore to knock the actuall devs is IMO disgracefull, if it wasnt for them, you would have a SHV that was a lot harder to turn into a "full" sim.

Of course bugs are a problem, but they will be fixed, or at least reduced over time. But that is down to the publishers say not the devs. Obviously, the DRM has nothing at all to do with the devs.

[AVGWarhawk]

I have not played COD online in a while. I actually played with two retired gentlemen and one women who was the wife of the retires. Anyone else who wanted to join in. But that is neither here nor there. I do not have hours to sit and play sub games online. I enjoy single player. However, look at this way. Find another sub game you can play at all let alone multiplayer that you like? I think you have SH1 or something like that? So far your only gripe would be mutiplayer. I would venture to guess the demand to fix multiplayer is not out there. At any rate, if you are playing online many hours, what game are you playing? SH4?

[jdkbph]

You keep letting them give you crap, crap is all you will ever get.
It's statements like thi, that bring us to the place we are at in gaming.
Where they think it's ok to give us garbage and let us deal with it.
In the days of nintendo, every game worked.
That's the way it should be.



I understand you're angry and frustrated. But you really should take a few minutes to actually read what's being said and think about how your reply will be received.

I did not say I was satisfied with the current state of affairs. I was pointing out that the cause may be other than you believe it to be. You're lashing out at the devs and, IMHO, that may be unfair.

And to your Nintendo point... if you really want to go back in the day and extrapolate forward, try this one on for size. I remember buying games for my Commodore 64 back in the early 80s... they came on a tape or a floppy disk with a Xeroxed manual all packaged in a plastic baggie. The first truly commercial computer games were better packaged but otherwise much the same.

The price?... $50.

Tell me.... what other entertainment products have you seen go through such a dramtic transformation (mostly positive) while holding the same price point for 30 years?

I think about this and smile every time I read a post where someone is complaining about the price of these games.

Did labor costs go down over the last 30 years? Did it get any easier or cheaper to develop, publish and distribute these games?

These guys are in business... the difference had to made up somewhere. The audience had to be expanded. Those companies that didn't get it - and that would be 90% + of all the major software houses that sprang up over the years BTW - are no longer with us.

I think about this too every time I read a post where someone is complaining about lack of game play or attention to detail in the latest gee-whiz eye candy extravaganza.

I'm not smiling when I think about that.

But hey... it's not all bad. You want quality? You want game play? You want the detail and accuracy in your games that only comes from passion and pride in the product all up and down the management chain? Head over to Matrix Games and check out their line up. Of course don't expect to be floored by the eye candy. You just can't get it all in one package these days... not for $50 anyway.

JD

[skwasjer]

Some of you have NO clue whatsoever regarding (game) development and the amount of work involved. Sure, we should not get a buggy product, I agree, but I personally am quite a perfectionist, but none of my (commercial) products have been bug free.

Windows/Mac/Linux? Bugs... Motherboard? Bugs... Smart phone? Bugs... What about 1 million cars with bad brakes or tires? What about that faulty pour of concrete in your new house? What about faulty hydraulics in a jetliner? Really, put it in perspective.

Now I will admit I would be pissed of as well if the software product does not work as advertised (I don't have SH5), but it doesn't really help your case if you start attacking the company that made it. Your best bet is to remain calm and friendly, sum up the issues you experience, and wait for an answer/solution. Or don't buy it at all. There's always more ways of voicing your dislikes and concerns, but not all methods bring you what you wish for. Yelling only distances the company away.

Now that I've said this, I do hope Ubi whips out another patch for those of you experiencing some of the showstopping problems. But I'm sure they will deliver...

[Gunnodayak]

Gunno, stop monitoring your guys messages and start spending your time making products that work.
or you can have fun telling your GF or wife or whatever, why you get no christmas bonus next time around.
Bishop7 (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/member.php?u=252758) , I am deeply sorry, but I think you've misunderstood, I am Romanian and I was one of the main "attackers" of elanaiba, he was making a reference that he "made an effort" to respond to my "accusations". If you will carefully read that particular post, you will understand better. I have nothing related to UBI, except anger! But I will stop here now, my "vendetta" with them is over, I've attracted so much antipathy from some forum members enough for my entire life doing that ... I am not afraid, but I am bored already, anyway, we are just saying things in vain. I have two options:
1. to forget about SH5 forever;
2. to forget about SH5 at least 6 months or a year, when MAYBE the game will be playable.

[AVGWarhawk]

SH4 is still broken in some respects for sure. You realize that when you mod the files. Yep, it sucks. So I agree with you there Bishop. For now and probably forever this is all we will have in a reasonably good submarine game. So we take our lumps and send a few back to UBI. However, we have something that provides hours of entertainment and in some respects let downs (sounds like my wife). :hmmm: The other mutiplayer games like COD get old after awhile. Flight sims not so much. I played those for years.

[KG_Jag]

Call me old fashion, but when I buy something--anything--I expect it to be reliable and reasonably fit for its purpose. That is why (at least until recently), I would buy a small car from Toyota or Nissan and not from Yugo.

When I rent something, I don't expect to pay as much as if I had bought that same thing. One of the reasons I bought it is that I can keep and use it for as long as I like in most any way I like.

Is SH5 a product I should consider buying? It sure doesn't sound like it.

[FIREWALL]

As has been posted before.... The Devs can make suggestions to the publisher (Ubisoft) but they still work for them and do as their told.

Simple concept, why are most of you so thick to understand it.

Go tell your boss your going to do it YOUR way instead of his and, see how long YOU have a job. :yep:

[tater]

Regarding multiplay, there is a way to have really good submarine multiplay, IMO.

Players play their campaigns "offline" as usual, but obviously with a net connection (like OSP, actually, only this idea ADDS VALUE that makes it worthwhile).

When the game spots enemy units it goes online and looks for players interested in joining in as the enemy in your campaign. When the enemy AI in your game make a detection on your sub—or if your sub makes an attack that alerts them, then the game goes and fetches real players to take over some escorts. To the player it is 100% transparent, they have no idea if their target will be 100% AI, 100% players, or something in between.

Other players can join in taking over AI ships. If an online player has to leave, the ship reverts to AI status.

This would need a mature escort "game within a game." Heck, there is a paid add-on for you. Silent Hunter: Atlantic Destroyers or whatever. Heck, flight sim guys might love Silent Hunter: Coastal Command. You lanch the Ubi OSP widget, and "subscribe" to SH:CC, and when a player has Sunderlands sent out after him, it offers an ASW mission to subscribe "coastal Command" players. They hit "accept" and they take over the plane, and start their hunt. Submarine players never know if that dot is a crappy AI POS, or a player hell bent on seeing an oil slick.

THAT is how you add online value to a submarine game.

[Charlie901]

I think the Dev's should be blamed now only if they insist and expect the Modding Community to fix/add the mandatory missing content...

NOw that this game is retail they have an obligation and expecting the Modding community to take over is ludacris at this point.


Mods should only add to the game not replce features and fix bugs that were in all previous versions...!!!

[AVGWarhawk]

I would have to agree there tater! That would be very nice to play.

[Mav87th]

Regarding bugs in software..

I have been involved in addon developing for Falcon 4 for nearly a decade now - no new sim for us fast jet fan boys. But we now have the most modern, realistic and multiplayer friendly sim in existence - surpasing some of the airforces sims around the globe (at least one of the Danish Airforce's sims)

But we allso have bugs in our latest stuff. And even when we fix them we will have bugs.

Now we can either opt to stop using the sim and be grumpy, or we can learn to live with the bugs and circumvent them untill that bug is fixed and another is introduced - such is the life of a simmer.

The main problem with being a simmer vs. being a gamer is that we allways want more, more and more realistic stuff.....and it never ends.

Come on over to the bright side - leave the dark side!! - and be happy with what you CAN have right now, and look forward to what we will have with Mods or Dev's help in 6 months time. Untill then you can use what is ther - getting used to it and.....may God forbid...like some of it.

Personaly ill start by making small personal mods to increase my "feel of realism" and to build up my library of real documentation on using a U-boot. The other day i got a copy of the "recognitions manual" used via ebay "Die Handelsflotten der Welt 1942 und Nachtrag 1944" and when time fits i will scan in the pages containing the ships of SH-5 and make a PDF manual mod that people can print. Ill allso use the time to make a few of the REALY cool sliderules that fx. Hitman have stood father to.

In other words - you dont have to neglect the bugs, but you can circumvent them and look forward to a fix. Cus knowing this great community - fixed they will be !!:rock:

[tater]

I would have to agree there tater! That would be very nice to play.

As I've said before, I have no interest in u-boats except as: oil slicks, wreckage, or prizes (though Admiral King would be mightily POed if I towed a u-boat into port possibly under the 'scopes of other u-boats (cause it would encourage a code change).).

I'd happily buy the ATO escort game, particularly if my efforts ended player u-boat campaigns :)

[Onkel Neal]

OT FYI: Bishop decided to send me an obscenity-filled PM, and I really can't spend time on people lilke that, so he's not going to be part of this forum any longer.

Please continue.

[Iron Budokan]

It's an easy cop out to say "The boss made me do it."

The devs should be held accountable for some aspects of this game that was under their control.

Underwater bug? Since /3? And it's in this iteration, too? Seriously?

Come on. It's always easy to blame corporate executives. Sometimes negligence has a partner, that's all I'm saying.

[Egan]

First off I would like to say that I think the word 'blamed' is the wrong one. The developers have nothing to be 'blamed' for. They work for a large company that has a certain set of priorities and certain methods that allow them to achieve those priorities. They don't deserve the demonization that is beginning to make itself more obvious around here. FWIW I also don't believe in the opposite extreme where they have been almost sainted by various people.

What it comes down to is this: the devs are people who work for a games company. They clearly have an interest in world war two submarines but, at the end of the day, they are professional games developers who will work on whatever product they are tasked with because they are professionals and they need to eat, cloth their families and pay the mortgage. Unlike Firewall i don't think people are thick for forgetting some of this stuff but I do think that the weird fandamentalism - wordplay intended - that has increased in the gaming community as a whole over the last few years seems to force common sense out of peoples heads.

Beyond this is another point I would like to make: while I don't think the word 'Blamed' is the right one, I still think the developers, as the ones who made the actual game, should take some responsibility for it. Yes, they take their orders from management. So do I, so do a lot of you. But orders from management don't absolve us of taking responsibility for the quality of the job we do.

I have seen nothing so far that suggests to me that the developers will not take responsibility for the game. In fact, Dan's post in the other thread tells me that they are aware of many of the game's failings. I am sure many things will be patched. I am sure many things will not be and I'm fairly positive that it will never be the simulator I or many other people wanted. Here's the thing: Neither SH3 or SH4 were the sim I wanted but I thought both of them were a lot of fun. It's probably worth pointing out that nobody has yet made the sub sim I would be 100% in love with. And while I also don't believe that there should be a tacit compact between the devs and modders whereby the modders end up fixing the game (compass anyone?), I'm at least thankful that someone over there had the foresight and decency to provide us with a game that appears to be pretty moddable.

I don't own SH5 yet, and I have no plans on doing so for a while and not only because of the issues that have arisen. I do think it was brave to introduce new and unfamiliar features to the game. The chance to actually skipper a u-boat instead of playing all the roles is something I've been interested in for a while. That other traditional and tested features seem to have been hit is not something I feel good about but all we can do is see how it pans out.

I know I'm not the target demographic any more and that they don't make sims for people like me (which is rubbish by the way as anyone who has played Over Flanders's Field or Black Shark or read the recent interview with Maddox about Storm of War can verify,) but it think many of us forget that there ARE devs and publishers out there who still make damn good games and sims. it might take a while but I'm sure one day we will see a sub sim that presses all the buttons. Until then I've still got SH4.

Oh, and can we please dump all the silly car metaphors at the login button please. They don't work. If Sh5 crashes it doesn't throw me through the windscreen.

Just my thoughts.

[FIREWALL]

As has been posted before.... The Devs can make suggestions to the publisher (Ubisoft) but they still work for them and do as their told.

Simple concept, why are most of you so thick to understand it.

Go tell your boss your going to do it YOUR way instead of his and, see how long YOU have a job. :yep:


Still all to SLOW HUH ???

Please stop all the long winded posts all you fast "touch typist secretarys" :haha:

@ Neal... Maybe after all members get their preorders and play and post their opinions... You can put your easy going foot down and SAY ... OK now we work positively and FIX IT!!! And quit wasting energy laying blame.

Neal... It's your way or... the Hiway. :yep:

btwe Neal aren't these new mods kool ? :|\\

[AVGWarhawk]

It's an easy cop out to say "The boss made me do it."

The devs should be held accountable for some aspects of this game that was under their control.

Underwater bug? Since /3? And it's in this iteration, too? Seriously?

Come on. It's always easy to blame corporate executives. Sometimes negligence has a partner, that's all I'm saying.

I disagree with number one sentence. Not a cop out. It is retaining a job. And or retaining a working atmosphere one enjoys.

HOWEVER....I agree with your second assessment! Bugs from two games ago are still present and accounted for here today with this release. Good observation sir!

[JU_88]

Uber I am personaly growing rather bored of your angst ridden topics. You should take a break.

Shv is what it is, now let's deal with it and try and move forwards.
No amount of ranting or placing blame is going to help anyone or change a god damn thing.

[Egan]

Still all to SLOW HUH ???

Please stop all the long winded posts all you fast "touch typist secretarys" :haha:

@ Neal... Maybe after all members get their preorders and play and post their opinions... You can put your easy going foot down and SAY ... OK now we work positively and FIX IT!!! And quit wasting energy laying blame.

Neal... It's your way or... the Hiway. :yep:

btwe Neal aren't these new mods kool ? :|\\




:D well, what can you say to a man on a mission? personally I like the evolution of a concept. Really, you should hear me on a pet subject.

I'll try and reduce it down to a haiku. :hmmm:

The devs did this bad

It has made us very mad.

Somewhere, a dog sings.

:salute:

I'm sorry about the rude text Neal. I guess we all knew that silly season was coming though.

[Webster]

I disagree with number one sentence. Not a cop out. It is retaining a job. And or retaining a working atmosphere one enjoys.



its easy enough to test this, if Iron Budokan would refuse to do what his boss tells him to do and just goes do whatever he himself thinks is best then he can report back to us if his boss thanks him for doing whats right or not.

lets see what happens :O:

[AVGWarhawk]

its easy enough to test this, if Iron Budokan would refuse to do what his boss tells him to do and just goes do whatever he himself thinks is best then he can report back to us if his boss thanks him for doing whats right or not.

lets see what happens :O:

I can attest to telling the boss what to do. Once I told my boss to go F himself. I was not going to do what he wanted. Two months later I'm here at a totally different company. Much better off I might add! But yeah, he is the boss for a reason. It is boss and employee. Not Board of Trustees. :har:

[FIREWALL]

As has been posted before.... The Devs can make suggestions to the publisher (Ubisoft) but they still work for them and do as their told.

Simple concept, why are most of you so thick to understand it.

Go tell your boss your going to do it YOUR way instead of his and, see how long YOU have a job. :yep: Post #21

Still all to SLOW HUH ???

Please stop all the long winded posts all you fast "touch typist secretarys" :haha:

@ Neal... Maybe after all members get their preorders and play and post their opinions... You can put your easy going foot down and SAY ... OK now we work positively and FIX IT!!! And quit wasting energy laying blame.

Neal... It's your way or... the Hiway. :yep:

btwe Neal aren't these new mods kool ? :|\\

post#30

its easy enough to test this, if Iron Budokan would refuse to do what his boss tells him to do and just goes do whatever he himself thinks is best then he can report back to us if his boss thanks him for doing whats right or not.

lets see what happens :O:

Your wasteing your breath WEBSTER

Their all on a roll or mission and showing to other Websites how "THICK" we are... Well some of us anyways.

[Uber Gruber]

I've heard a lot of fellows in life say "We were only doing what we were ordered to do." - unfortunately with mostly dire consequences. I suppose it depends on how you view your contribution to life...:hmmm:

Uber I am personaly growing rather bored of your angst ridden topics. You should take a break. Hahaha....well there you go my friend, just add me to your ignore list - problem solved.:yep:

I'm opening this thread back up in case you want to reply, call me an appeaser, etc.
Thanks for opening it back up but am at a loss as to why you closed it, or indeed what it is you want me to reply to. Perhaps you could send me a PM ?

Cheers, UG

[HundertzehnGustav]

so now the dev teamm has the opportunity why we should not point fingers at them, or point guns at them?

very nice. very very nice.
if i was one of the devteam, i would not answer.
i dont expect one of them to do so. They aint exactly "stupid" you know...

[Highbury]

In another thread, started by urfisch, Dan took the time to respond as best he could to complaints about SH5. So why is there another thread calling out devs to respond? We have already had a good honest response, more then most companies will give you.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1292441&postcount=20

Also, in that reply from Dan he mentioned that the separation between "devs" and "suits" only exists on the Subsim forum. In his opinion they are one and the same (both are Ubi in his opinion) and should be discussed as such.

What is the point of this thread?

[FIREWALL]

I've heard a lot of fellows in life say "We were only doing what we were ordered to do." - unfortunately with mostly dire consequences. I suppose it depends on how you view your contribution to life...:hmmm:


Hahaha....well there you go my friend, just add me to your ignore list - problem solved.:yep:


When you grow up and get a Real life adult job, you will understand.. :yep:

btw an Allowance isn't a Real Job... :haha:

[CCIP]

Gruber, no problem with discussion, but... why do we need to play the blame game? Does it really matter now? I think the only net result here isn't arriving at some kind of analytical truth, it's spoiling positive attitudes and what's to date been a reasonably good relation between the devs and the community. Figuring out WHAT is wrong, and HOW to fix it is productive at this stage. Asking WHO to blame for it... where will that get us? Nowhere.

[HundertzehnGustav]

sim outhouse.com motto/

let being helpful
be more impoprtant
than being right

SHV forum Motto?
Lets rip this game apart and reassemble as we see fit.

Blame game:down:
pack3d, hexeditor and Photoshop:yeah:

[Iron Budokan]

its easy enough to test this, if Iron Budokan would refuse to do what his boss tells him to do and just goes do whatever he himself thinks is best then he can report back to us if his boss thanks him for doing whats right or not.

lets see what happens :O:

You wouldn't know this, and that's cool. But I used to do geophysical work for Texaco in the 80s. I was making a veritable TON of money. I finally had enough (all the horror stories you heard about oil companies and how they treat people are true) and I walked out and never looked back.

Yes. Believe it or not some people do have principles. Some people.

[AVGWarhawk]

You wouldn't know this, and that's cool. But I used to do geophysical work for Texaco in the 80s. I was making a veritable TON of money. I finally had enough (all the horror stories you heard about oil companies and how they treat people are true) and I walked out and never looked back.

Yes. Believe it or not some people do have principles. Some people.

Sure. I completely understand. I told my boss to go F himself because I did have enough of the crap after 11 years. I knew what would follow. So yeah, one can only get beat to death for so long before they tell the other to shove. :up:

[FIREWALL]

You wouldn't know this, and that's cool. But I used to do geophysical work for Texaco in the 80s. I was making a veritable TON of money. I finally had enough (all the horror stories you heard about oil companies and how they treat people are true) and I walked out and never looked back.

Yes. Believe it or not some people do have principles. Some people.

Kinda Thank you on the Bio of your DADS job. :har:

Give us a break junior. :roll:

[AVGWarhawk]

Thanks for opening it back up but am at a loss as to why you closed it, or indeed what it is you want me to reply to. Perhaps you could send me a PM ?

Cheers, UG


Neal shut it because of another member. Not what you were doing. Member subsequently excommunicated from SS. Thread reopened. Carry on! :yeah:

[Threesixtyci]

Tell me.... what other entertainment products have you seen go through such a dramtic transformation (mostly positive) while holding the same price point for 30 years?

Well, how many games *sold* 30 years ago compared to today? And what percentage of them want 100% realism in their games compared to 20 years ago? Need to also factor in that gaming companies want to attract the largest of that percentage. Which ends up catering to the mainstream audience.

Which is not going to be *us*; hardcore gamers who prefer realistic gameplay rather than being given a barrel full of fish to shoot with a shotgun.



2) Please stop trying to create a war / antagonism between modders and devs, we need each other.


With the small exception that modders don't get paid, and have to *pay* for their game just like everyone else. Regardless seem very odd to me that a dev know what the hardcore crowd wants, but won't add the mod/features, themselves.

I mean, why not just add it in via a difficulty toggles or something? Or at the very least, add in your own module support, such as that indi game, Mount and Blades did, and what Bethesda does with their games, since Morrowind.

Not to mention this DRM thing that was added, which pretty much goes against everything a modder believes in. Ehem, Need each other? Sorry, but it feels like something else to me.

[Onkel Neal]

I've heard a lot of fellows in life say "We were only doing what we were ordered to do." - unfortunately with mostly dire consequences. I suppose it depends on how you view your contribution to life...:hmmm:




Yes, I imagine in real life you are a pillar of individuality. You own your own business, right? No one tells you what job you should do. No wife to compromise with either?

I think Dan made it pretty clear to most of us that the Devs accept the blame for missing milestones and not having the game ready at the projected release date. What do you expect, a handwritten apology for every anonymous schmoo who calls them out in a public forum?

This is why developers very rarely interact with a community forum, they can never satisfy all the demands and questions and whining.

Whatever caused it: overambitious game design, bad time management, sneaking off to the taco truck too often, attending a meeting in Copenhagen to demo the game before a group of players, mistakes, oversights, etc. who knows? I'm going to say I doubt it was lack of ability, they have nothing to prove. SH3 and SH4 are fantastic subsims.

You have a choice, buy the game or not. Make it and move on, we're running a forum here for submarine sim enthusiasts.

[Uber Gruber]

Neal shut it because of another member. Not what you were doing. Member subsequently excommunicated from SS. Thread reopened. Carry on! :yeah:Thanks, I was not aware of this. I suspected some kind of controversy.

@CCIP
I have to say I agree with you as a rule. But after the failings of SH2, the initial state of SH3 at release, the disaster of SH4 reflected by it's sales figures...well you have to ask yourself if the right people are doing the right jobs. I can accept a certain level of buggyness, hell everything I release has bugs, but after SH2, SH3, SH4 and now SH5, you start to ask big questions.


Yes, I imagine in real life you are a pillar of individuality. You own your own business, right? No one tells you what job you should do. No wife to compromise with either?
I'm not really sure why you wrote that.

they have nothing to prove. SH3 and SH4 are fantastic subsims.
Well I suppose thats where we differ. I do not think they were fantastic subsims. If mods didn't exist then I wonder how many of us would be playing SH3 or SH4 :hmmm:.

I really fail to see why you are so adamantly defensive here. I can only conclude it is because you met the devs and bonded, well thats understandable, even honourable. But surely questions must be raised if we (oh, sorry)..one is to aspire for the return of quality rather than simply bending over and bathing the head in sand ?

[HundertzehnGustav]

but gruber, does "one" open a "BLAME" thread to make things better and bring forth the best in someone?

BLAME is very destructive... and not motivating at all.

[Nimmo55]

Neal, don't you think you're being just a little hard on those who are expressing dissappointment with this game? (Granted...some are labouring the point for sure...but hey..that's ok, isn't it??) This "get over it and move on!" dictum; perhaps just a little severe? :hmmm:

I for one have bought every SH game that has come out, but not this one...I accept that the publishers have made a business decision to target the mass audience...I get it and have "moved on"....doesn't mean I'm happy about that...or that I am not going to express my dissapointment a little in the process. That's the fantastic thing about your forum; it is the place where I can do that..and have intelligent posts on the subject. The best place in the world to discuss sub-sims! :DL

I'm curious though, Neal...there really DOES seem to be a genuine disconnect between expectations of the hard-core community and what Ubisoft have produced this time...probably more than when SH3/4 came out (questionable?) You interviewed the deveopers in the lead up to this game's release...was there any sign that they had seen or even registered the mounting concern that manifested itself on your very forum when you interviewed them? Or was it more about sticking to a line in order to build profile for the upcoming release? Did you feel yourself able to talk about these issues? I'd be curious from an interest point of view; I was a journalist here in Australia and I know what it's like to have a canned interview...and feel constrained in my questioning line...but I've never done an interview with a games studio. Grateful your point of view... Thanks. :salute:

Nimmo55 out!

[Onkel Neal]

Yes, I have been very open about that "bonding with the devs". I tend to bond quite easily to people I find intelligent, inspiring, thoughtful, honest, and hard-working. I think I have bonded with a lot of people in these forums, players and devs. The mission statement here is to enhance the submarine simulation experience for all players and create a community where the game developers and players can share the fun of playing good games, study naval history, and interact globally in person and online.

Sure, I understand what you mean about "bending over", that's a very crude slight against people who accept a game like SH5 or SH2 as someone who is weak, and easily manipulated. You want these people, of which I am one, to accept your label. Whatever. But how often are you going to keep repeating that insult?

We do not have our head in the sand. I am fully aware that SH2 was a finished but fundamentally flawed game. *Shrug* I still got some enjoyment out of it. SH3 was a fantastic game, nothing to say there. SH4 was unfinished and buggy, but after 4 patches, was a good game. SH5 is unfinished, of questionable design, and buggy. I know that, but I do like the game in some ways. And I will be clear about areas where the game fails, where it is dismal, as well as what things it does right and where it shines. If the scales tip in favor of the flaws, so be it. Sorry if my lack of hysteria over that disturbs you.

cheers :salute:
Neal

[JScones]

I think Dan answered this well before:
1) Ubisoft is a company, of which Ubisoft Romania is a part. Please stop separating the two. Not everything that is good is our merit, not everything that is bad is "the suits" fault. I, of all people, have my parts in the failures of SH5. The people "high up" could have simply decided not to do another SH, just as you guys can choose not to buy.
Now people can ignore the words from the Lead Designer himself and continue to "blame" the suits exclusively, or the devs exclusively, but by Dan's own words they would be wrong. Ubisoft as a whole screwed the pooch. Simple. No need for us to continue to look for someone to blame; it's been acknowledged.

IMHO we should leave the blamestorming for the Ubisoft Boardroom - I think there'll be some finger pointing in there over the next few months!

[Onkel Neal]

Neal, don't you think you're being just a little hard on those who are expressing dissappointment with this game? (Granted...some are labouring the point for sure...but hey..that's ok, isn't it??) This "get over it and move on!" dictum; perhaps just a little severe? :hmmm:

I for one have bought every SH game that has come out, but not this one...I accept that the publishers have made a business decision to target the mass audience...I get it and have "moved on"....doesn't mean I'm happy about that...or that I am not going to express my dissapointment a little in the process. That's the fantastic thing about your forum; it is the place where I can do that..and have intelligent posts on the subject. The best place in the world to discuss sub-sims! :DL



Hi Nimmo,

I hope I am not being hard over anyone expressing disappointment in the game, I'm certainly one of those people! :ping: You may find me unable to identify with people who just lose their minds over a game, though. Of course, people should be free to say, "I don't think I want to buy SH5" but after a few repeats of that message, there's not much else to say to them but "don't buy it, move on" because this is a discussion forum for SH5. I'm not sure how much someone can contribute to a discussion about a game they don't have or intend to get. They should feel 100% welcome to discuss SH3 or Dangerous Waters in those forums, and general topics, General Games, etc. Am I off the mark here? :06: We want to keep this forum The best place in the world to discuss sub-sims! (I'm going to run that quote in my future PR), so I am open to level-headed opinions, thanks.

And yes, you have the right to pass on this title, Ubisoft did not achieve the level of quality necessary for me to disagree with you there. Strategically, we probably disagree about the whole "support the only game company that makes a decent subsim by purchasing them, great, good, and bad, US subs, German subs". I've had debates about this for a long time, whether buying no matter what empowers the game company to crank out whatever crappy game they want to screw the customers out of their (here it comes...) hard earned money. I cannot say that line of thinking is empirically wrong.... but I do feel confident that sales = more subs games, and SH2 (bad game, sold well) led to SH3 (great game, sold well) lends strength to that argument. But, I could be wrong. :yep:

With SH5, as with the occasional PC game, the development just did not keep pace with the schedule. It was harder than they thought, to add the full sub and interactive crew. Mookie would say resources were better spent just making an SH3 2.0 and a lot would agree with him. That has to be the basis for a subsim before any enhancements like full boat access. Then again, to be fair, after SH3, a lot of people were asking for full boat access.... :hmmm:


I'm curious though, Neal...there really DOES seem to be a genuine disconnect between expectations of the hard-core community and what Ubisoft have produced this time...probably more than when SH3/4 came out (questionable?) You interviewed the deveopers in the lead up to this game's release...was there any sign that they had seen or even registered the mounting concern that manifested itself on your very forum when you interviewed them? Or was it more about sticking to a line in order to build profile for the upcoming release? Did you feel yourself able to talk about these issues? I'd be curious from an interest point of view; I was a journalist here in Australia and I know what it's like to have a canned interview...and feel constrained in my questioning line...but I've never done an interview with a games studio. Grateful your point of view...

I saw the demo in Denmark and spent 4 days with the dev team, but I did not hound them for details because I wanted those guys to relax and enjoy the meet and the activities. I had some concerns then, with the health bars and ship detection ranges in the demo, but as I was assured they are optional and don't really impact the simulation when turned off. As for the RPG elements and the state of completeness, that was in Sept, so as far as anyone knew, dev team included, the game could very well be finished in time for release. I guess that is like asking the football team in the 1st half if they will score 4 goals in a game. Well, maybe, that's the plan, we sure will try. With game development, sometimes it just doesn't work out according to the plan. I say to people, there's no reason to hate. Just don't buy.

As you know, many "interviews" are done via email. You send the questions, the game studio sends back answers. One reason it took so long for me to get an interview is I insisted on a phone interview--I wanted it to be spontaneous, not scripted in advance by email. You may have noticed I asked several times about the DRM but they were not able to divulge that info. I think we all knew that meant Uplay/OSP DRM (I did my homework).

As far as the design decisions, I wasn't clear that it was going in the direction it ended up until the phone interview, and they said Type VII only. Unlike previous Silent Hunter games, Ubisoft elected not to let me play test the game in the early beta. Well, it's their game. :dead:

I hope that answered your questions, very sorry it's so long. :wah:

best regards, :salute:
Neal

[Frederf]

In short: Partially.

The developers have a lot of understandable obstacles to making a good game: suits making poor high level decisions, market pressure, time constraints, coding complexities, hardcore zealots, design branches, etc. I can't blame the game level developers for everything. On the other hand there are noticeable failings that cannot be traced back to any excusable source.


The New Casual Direction

I understand that a word from above saying "the next Silent Hunter will appeal to a mass audience" is something the developers have to obey. However many of SH5's failings have no source in this directive. The casual audience wants generally much reward for very little effort, in a nut shell. Things like the deck watch not having binoculars can hardly be caused by this. The casual audience is not upset by historical accuracy directly. There is rarely any discernible value in things being wrong or broken


Design Decisions

This is level where most of my dev-blame is directed. At an early point in the design process the entirety of the gameplay experience is traced out on paper. In a very general sense the user experience is anticipated, engineered so that the final product will correspond to the marketing goal. So many parts of SH5 make my mind scream WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?

You wanted to appeal to a mass audience and yet you tied necessary gameplay functions to morale? Don't you realize that the casual audience hates being "artificially" limited by practical constraints? "Sorry sir, we can't shoot back. I'm feeling blue today." Don't you realize that hardcore audience is going to hate this because it makes no sense from a simulation point of view and the casual audience is going to hate this because it keeps them from their quick sugar fix? Who exactly were you pleasing with that?

I have plenty of similar examples where the paper outline planning process should have thrown big red flags but yet these core design problems leaked through.


Community Interaction and Fear

Ideally the developers should be able to have an open, constructive dialog with the community to best gauge their wants and interest. Unfortunately there have been problems with such things as a "suggestion thread" and thus it is avoided. Why? Because the developing company is fearful of the PR landmine that is customer interaction.

Developer: "Looking for ideas guys."
Person A: "Hey why not model the crew without hats, very rarely worn in a real submarine."
Developer: "Hey, that's a good idea. It isn't massive amounts of work, appeals to casual and hardcore audiences equally, and doesn't redirect the design direction."
Person B: "i wan all ships in war model. u shud play as any airplane and sume birds."
Person C: "Please model 27 types of radar and ASW equipment in excruciating detail while researching every sailors ever afloat."
Developer: "Those ideas are stupid and impractical respectively. No way-Jose."
*** FECES STORM LEVEL FIVE BREAKS OUT ***
Publisher: "Developer, your idea of interacting with the community has failed miserably. You're fired and we're never doing that again."

As a community/media entity we rarely make reasoned, responsible contributions. The developer is either afraid or forbidden (because PR is afraid) to talk to us for fear that we will be offended or the developer will be distracted from the practically-narrow design guidelines. In this way we are to blame as a community. Imagine yourself as a developer responding to one of those 127 page suggestion threads... without upsetting anyone, making a 20 year development cycle, or ending up with a weird "design by committee" game without a clear design focus.


Technical Problems

I fully sympathize with technical problems being of a high importance. Subsim only sees really the design flaws that are second priority to the technical stuff like "will the exe run." I understand these can be a headache and take lots of time to sort out. At no point do I blame the devs for encountering these problems or struggling to fix them. The "you fools have no clue what real software development is like" people like to espouse this point in their usual crass, ham-fisted verbiage. My sympathy is compartmentalized since no matter what the state of software design process is, when you make 20 gauges in the 3D submarine and only 7 work correctly... that's just incompetence.

[karamazovnew]

In short: Partially.
My sympathy is compartmentalized since no matter what the state of software design process is, when you make 20 gauges in the 3D submarine and only 7 work correctly... that's just incompetence.


True. Sad to say that the game in its current state is by far the most buggy game I've ever played. I remember the days of Falcon 4 which crashed all the time because of the immensity of it all. But Morale resetting at each load? Have they actually PLAYED the game?! It's clear to me that the game was rushed ahead by the mother company just to see the effect of OSP and if it can be cracked. :damn:

[Gunnodayak]

Sad to say that the game in its current state is by far the most buggy game I've ever played.
Maybe it will enter in Guiness Book of Records because of that, it does have the required potential ...

[makman94]

ok...i played the game and here is my review :

'' does anybody knows if ''Jane's simulations'' or ''Sonalysts'' are still active companies ??? ''


you see , hope ....dies last.....

[Reece]

The fact remains that the developers of the game are 100% to blame for the game in it's current state, unfinished and yes the buggiest version so far, they made it!:doh:
At the very beginning we were told "All new code" and that Ubisoft was moving towards quality games, they failed!!:-? And before everyone starts to say "when did they say that", I think Neal would vouch for this, if it was "All new code" then why are the same bugs repeated from earlier versions?:hmmm:
There is no excuse for releasing a game in this appalling condition! they may patch it and modders may fix some, but certainly not all the problems will be fixed and should not have been released this way in the first place. SH4 still has a lot of hard coded errors that only the devs could fix, and that isn't going to happen, I would like to know "who beta tested this", or why were they ignored!!:x

[DeadlyWolf]

IMHO we should leave the blamestorming for the Ubisoft Boardroom - I think there'll be some finger pointing in there over the next few months!
Oh yes, you can bet it.
I don't know if you meant this, but God only knows the TONS and TONS of release sales they lost thanks to their ingenious DRM, broken in 12 hours. Twelve.

The current state of the game? Yes, Ubisoft as a whole can be blamed for that, *but* it's something that can be repaired. On the other hand no one is going to refund for the lost potential moneys\market share(\sequel?).

[makman94]

..... modders may fix some, but certainly not all the problems will be fixed ....

yes Reece,sure modders will fix things but this is a dev's job and dev's responsillity 100% !! they own to do so for the money they asked for the game .it is their job after all ....if moders fix things they will lose their job or....will prepare an unfinished game . i really believe that they will release a TRUE patch with correcting all things ...they have all the tools ,the knowledge and the time ....yes the time!they are on this project for more than 8 years !!

[jwilliams]

, *but* it's something that can be repaired. On the other hand no one is going to refund for the lost potential moneys\market share(\sequel?).

But will it be repaired??

I still have bugs in SH3.

SH4 still has bugs... although i've only read about them cus i refused to buy it due to its unfinished state.

Maybe thats your lost sales there.... not the pirates

and SH5 is the same bugs as 3 & 4 but with the added effect of 5.

Ubi should be ashamed to realease a game in such a bug ridden state.

:nope:

[Reece]

yes Reece,sure modders will fix things but this is a dev's job and dev's responsillity 100% !! they own to do so for the money they asked for the game .it is their job after all ....if moders fix things they will lose their job or....will prepare an unfinished game . i really believe that they will release a TRUE patch with correcting all things ...they have all the tools ,the knowledge and the time ....yes the time!they are on this project for more than 8 years !!
Yes you are right, I was being polite!!:haha:

Advertisement: Buy Silent Hunter 5 Bugs, it's almost game free!:haha:

[Subsim Monitor]

ok...i played the game and here is my review :

'' does anybody knows if ''Jane's simulations'' or ''Sonalysts'' are still active companies ??? ''


you see , hope ....dies last.....

Nope, they are done. Why? Not enough sales.

[makman94]

Nope, they are done. Why? Not enough sales.

Subsim Admin .....:hmmm:?? new at forum :D??? hehehe....

you say not enough sales ?? hard to believe ..... ok their last pack (sub commands) was released at 2005 ( ? ) but in fact was a remake of the very older 688(i) (which still is on my pc !! ) so the graphics are ....xm...ok stoneage so this is a cuase of not good sales but expectable i think

[Takeda Shingen]

you say not enough sales ?? hard to believe ..... ok their last pack (sub commands) was released at 2005 ( ? ) but in fact was a remake of the very older 688(i) (which still is on my pc !! ) so the graphics are ....xm...ok stoneage so this is a cuase of not good sales but expectable i think

Dangerous Waters was the last Sonalysts release, not Sub Command. And, no, it did not sell. Accordingly, the company has left the commercial game market behind.

[makman94]

Dangerous Waters was the last Sonalysts release, not Sub Command. And, no, it did not sell. Accordingly, the company has left the commercial game market behind.

yes you are right ...it was Dangerous Waters.....my bad.
but don't you agree that it was expectable not to sell much with these graphics? [from 688(i)]
correct me if i am wrong as i haven't really played Dangerous Waters.i 'followed' till sub command

[Takeda Shingen]

yes you are right ...it was Dangerous Waters.....my bad.
but don't you agree that it was expectable not to sell much with these graphics? [from 688(i)]
correct me if i am wrong as i haven't really played Dangerous Waters.i 'followed' till sub command

No, I wouldn't agree. The 688(i)/Sub Command/Dangerous Waters lineage was developed and marketed as hardcore study simulations in the vein of Microsoft Flight Simulator and Falcon 4.0. Graphics are not important to the crowd that would be interested in this type of game. Rather, this type of game appeals to the type of simulation nerd, of which I happen to be, that is willing to spend hours doing the trigonometry required in manual target motion analysis. It is about the accurate modeling of acoustics and ship systems, not HDR lighting and anti-aliasing.

Sonalysts banked on the fact that cornering this niche market within a niche market would prove profitable. They were wrong. Ubi is banking that a reduced focus on realism and an incorporation of roleplaying elements will ensure it's series longevity. We shall see what happens.

[makman94]

No, I wouldn't agree. The 688(i)/Sub Command/Dangerous Waters lineage was developed and marketed as hardcore study simulations in the vein of Microsoft Flight Simulator and Falcon 4.0. Graphics are not important to the crowd that would be interested in this type of game. Rather, this type of game appeals to the type of simulation nerd, of which I happen to be, that is willing to spend hours doing the trigonometry required in manual target motion analysis. It is about the accurate modeling of acoustics and ship systems, not HDR lighting and anti-aliasing.

Sonalysts banked on the fact that cornering this niche market within a niche market would prove profitable. They were wrong. Ubi is banking that a reduced focus on realism and an incorporation of roleplaying elements will ensure it's series longevity. We shall see what happens.

ok Takeda Shingen i understand you(forget the dangerous waters) but i think that the ''missing' point for the sales is exactly the bad graphics and not the realism level of Jane's .this is EASY EASY enough to be reduced even to zero by ingame options!the hard part (and the challenge) is to make something real then its easy to adjust to all players's wills

can you imagine this game...yes this so old game as it is but with the last modern graphics ?? oh ,i bet it will sell like crazy...even now and even if anybody knew that the core is the same!
but ,as you said,....time will tell ! i just will keep hope Jane's to show up again...with a battle in Atlantic this time !

[jwilliams]

Sonalysts banked on the fact that cornering this niche market within a niche market would prove profitable. They were wrong. Ubi is banking that a reduced focus on realism and an incorporation of roleplaying elements will ensure it's series longevity. We shall see what happens.

I think the best approch should be to make SH a hardcore sim, then add options that make it appeal to the casual player. eg. auto lock, rpg elements and the like. But allow the hardcore sim to be still be a hardcore sim if the player so wishes. And i know this is what they have tried to do with allowing options to be changed. but theres too many features that cant be turned off.
Guess my only hope is that modders can remove the arcade like features. but this depends on what is hard coded.

fingers crossed :yep:

[Takeda Shingen]

but ,as you said,....time will tell ! i just will keep hope Jane's to show up again...with a battle in Atlantic this time !

I'd love to see Janes back. Not necessarily in a WWII title, but back as they were. Until then, I will content myself with Dangerous Waters, which has had a place on my hard drive since it's release, and which I have played nearly every day from that time on.

[karamazovnew]

At the moment the game is sort-of like this:

http://www.fa1l.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/018_fail.jpg

Considering the rallying on the Mod Workshop section, it should be clear that we won't abandon this game. I'm actually pretty impressed by the game and the modding capabilities so far. But we do need that bug list to be fixed by Ubi first. If they leave it like this, then... yeah...

http://9gag.com/photo/3802_full.jpg

[Nimmo55]

Neal, thanks very much for replying and sharing your thoughts; I sure see you're point of view. Yea....I am still torn over whether to shell out money for this thing. I really do want to support about the only company out there doing sub sims...if I don't, and everyone else doesn't, than it will fail for sure. And we can't be sure they'll learn the 'right' lesson from a momentous fail: instead of "Well, that'll teach us for ignoring the hard-core sim community and producing an arcadish level game. We should've done the hard-core sim from the start! Damm! Won't make that mistake again!"..they may well conclude: no money in sub sims...let's cut our losses and exit stage right at the speed of a thousand startled gazelles.

And yet...I still don't want to reward what I strongly suspect (note: I still haven't got it..so I'm relying on the selected rewiews..) is a sub-standard/wrong headed, half finished piece of software with enourmous potential. Hmmmm. What to do?

Neal, I am mightily encouraged by these incredible people called modders; see what they're doing already? Turning the UI into SH4 style...a step in the right direction alright! I think the modders are going to salvage this thing...we just have to be a bit patient and allow them the time to go to town on it. They didn't let us down with SH3/4...made good simulations even better (especially SH3...) and I'm willing to bet they will come through this time. Someone should really alert the gaming magazines and badger them to do an article on the sub sim phenonemum of our time - the modding community: company releases sub sim...modding community gets hold of it...turns it into an even better simulation.

Ok...I've rabbited on enough. Thanks Neal for your forum...take it easy!

Nimmo55 out! :salute:

[Frederf]

Turning the UI into SH4 style...a step in the right direction alright!

Booooo! Wrooooong!

[Reece]

Yeh! why bother!!:haha: Sorry about that!:oops:

[Nimmo55]

Oh yea? With respect, gotta disagree with you ...want the arcade look, do you? The sterile Windows 7 feel? The SH4 look may not be ideal...much better to have an interface that simulates a real German U Boot interface....but hey, having at least the realistic SH4 UI is better than the Walmart interface SH5 currently has. So yea...SH4 modded UI IS a step in the right direction.

Nimmo55 out! :salute:

[THE_MASK]

I reckon the devs should be blamed for giving modders the best modding tools imaginable and they are giving tutorials and helping out in the SH5 mods section . This is getting better by the minute .

[dize]

I reckon the devs should be blamed for giving modders the best modding tools imaginable and they are giving tutorials and helping out in the SH5 mods section . This is getting better by the minute .

yup. i think that this game is realy some sort of trojan horse. the ultimate subsim tool, clad in a candy-like arcade look.
in about a year or so, ppl will look back at these kind of complaining posts, with their heads shaking in disbelief.