SimHQ Reviews SH5

[LukeFF]

http://www.simhq.com/_naval/naval_036a.html

http://www.simhq.com/_commentary/all_099a.html

[There] are some serious problems that badly need to be resolved. The game is currently a buggy nightmare in some critical areas. Certainly there are bugs with all games, and some are forgivable, but some of the bugs in Silent Hunter 5 are near showstoppers. There are already some mods released that will correct some of the deficiencies in the game, but the fact that the second patch — the one that is supposed to correct many of these problems — is delayed once again means players that bought the game in good faith are still waiting for fixes that shouldn’t have been in the gold release.

[Feuer Frei!]

Actually one of the better reviews i've read re the game.
Nothing new of course in that review.

[daft]

I take it that the phrase "bought it in good faith" actually means "decided to throw all personal responsibility out the window and decided to not do ANY research on the title whatsoever in order to find out if SHV actually lives up to the consumers hopes and expectations". I really don't think that argument holds water in this day and age. I could understand it in the pre-internet age when you couldn't be arsed to wait for the magazine reviews, but now we have internet and opinions and reviews are generally out before the games are released. I have no issue at all with people taking issue with the quality of the game and complaining about that to Ubi directly, but it really isn't a very well kept secret that SHV has bugs and it haven't beem since the game came out.

[Bilge_Rat]

very even handed review:

Boy, is this a hard game to not recommend. Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic is one of the more in-depth (no pun intended) games currently out there. The game play is good. The graphics are very well done. The campaign is outstanding. Simply put, this is one of the better one-two-three punches in the gameplay world.



I tried SH4 again yesterday, but I just can't get into it anymore with its clunky interface and controls, there is something about SH5 that keeps drawing me back to it. If Ubi gets its act together, SH5 will be the best in the series.

[mookiemookie]

Clearly someone who has spent time with the game. Very nice review.

[raymond6751]

I believe that SH5 is not seriously flawed. It just doesn't meet with the expectations of the subsim community.

It is true that there are many irritations, things missing, and incorrectly presented. The game does not CTD in my experience.

The modders are fixing cosmetic things and adding missing things that we had in earlier versions. In fact, they are re-enabling them since the game retains much of the file system of SH4. SH4 itself retained much of SH3.

The tragedy is that SH5 wasn't what anyone expected. UBI went right ahead making a game that neither retained the best of the SH3/4 games nor added much of the hoped-for features.

I'd be interested in hearing what new players (never played SH3 or 4) think of the game.

[Frumpkis]

I appreciate the review, since I haven't bought SH5 yet (and may never buy it, depending on future patch/mod status). It was a good overview, although I would have liked to hear more about the AI. Evasion after an attack is half the fun and challenge in subsim, and there really wasn't much said about it, other than that DD's are more effective later in the war (well, duh!).

Can a DD make you sweat bullets after an attack? That's what I play these games for, and frankly even with SH4 that doesn't happen often enough. The situational awareness in these sims is also lousy during a depth charge attack, compared to real life. Sub commanders would know how close the charges were, on what side of the boat, high or low, etc..... stuff we never get in the game unless you "cheat" and use an external view.

Just my opinion, but all of these Silent Hunter games have done a much better job of modeling the attack phase -- blowing stuff up REAL GOOD -- than they have the evasion phase.

As for the DRM side article, I agree of course, although it's interesting how situational that is. Six months ago I was struggling with a very unreliable cable Internet service that would drop out for literally days at a time. I woudn't even consider buying a game that used this system, back then. Now I'm on a slightly slower, but rock-solid DSL connection, and I'm taking constant connection for granted. It does tend to dampen down the nerd rage about needing it for games, although in the abstract I know how horrible a system that is... and I have a feeling it won't survive this current "experiment" by Ubi and others. I think the future is going to be Steam-like digital distribution where at least some form of offline play is available.

[badaboom]

Right-On!!:rock:

[The General]

Like Neal's review this one was very level-headed.

[Faamecanic]

For the most part a decent and fair review...a few parts made me go "Huh?" :06:

For Example:

"It is almost possible to become virtually sea sick. The boat rocks and rolls, the waves roll over the ship and the white caps look authentic. "

They must have a different sim. I still see the "sub on rails" with very little relative motion, especially in the roll arena. A carry over from SH3 and 4 that should have been fixed looong ago. Play GWX with SH3 if you want to see what decent pitch and roll look like.

"Ships are rendered in even more detail compared to forerunners Silent Hunter III and Silent Hunter 4. Details are even more intricate with much more detailed warships and merchants"

Yes they are more detailed....too bad there are only a few types of Cargo vessels. No mention of that in the review.

"The English voices in the game are done with a slightly cheesy German accent which is mildly amusing and not too distracting."

No mention of the absolutely idiotic "Ludicris Speed Ahead" But thats nit picking. They could say "Everyone don your pink panties and boas" for all I care if this game wasnt so bugged.

"
One of the worst examples of this is when you are on the bridge and want to crash dive. If you order any kind of dive, the boat will not do it until you come down into the conning tower. No offense, but if I see an enemy destroyer bearing down on me, I am going to yell for a crash dive and then run for the hatch, not jump down into the boat and call for a crash dive."

Glad they pointed this out. I too love the idea of interacting with the crew, moving about my sub. But for the love of all.... the Germans had VOICE TUBES to tell the helmsman, Chief and all "CRASH DIVE". Im looking forward to mods that increase the crew interaction (I must be strange as it seems Im in the minority here).

"I can’t review a game based upon what mods are out, so out of the box, Silent Hunter 5 definitely needs some help."

THANK YOU!!!! Finally someone that gets it. I grow tired of being bashed and told "yes this game sux but mods will fix it". To me I base my critisim off of an UNmodded game. I DONT want game developers/publishers getting into the habbit of releasing half finished games and rely on FREE mods to fix them.

"The campaign structure is fairly simple. You start out as a young U-boat commander in 1939 and you work your way through to 1943, gradually upgrading your boat. Once you get done with the initial campaign around the British Isles, you can select different segments of the campaign based upon your peaked interest, and upon the success you have in the initial setup. It eventually culminates in the disaster that was 1943, when the Allies finally started getting the upper hand on the U-boat threat."

No mention of the CRAPTASTIC tonnage requirements that are totally unrealistic or just plain stupid (you MUST sink a carrier or battleship??? O-rly... and in the history of Uboats how many times did a Uboat sink a capital ship?)

"The AI in the game tends to vary, which is probably realistic. I have found that spooking enemy destroyers is fairly easy early on in the game, but as time goes on and as ASW equipment improves, the destroyers get better. "

Laughable at best.... In two patrols out of Kiel (after I stopped playing the sim) I was sunk once by a friendly merchat in the Kiel locks going in reverse and smashing me into the lock wall..... AI sucks in this sim...period.

"The campaign is outstanding. "

WTF?? See my above statement about the campaign.

"Sadly, the fact is for right now, I cannot recommend Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic in its current condition."

A good wrap up. Even though I disagree to a certain degree with some of SimHQs review...the wrap up I agree with 100%. Lets see where the patch takes us..... :up:

[Frumpkis]

No mention of the CRAPTASTIC tonnage requirements that are totally unrealistic or just plain stupid (you MUST sink a carrier or battleship??? O-rly... and in the history of Uboats how many times did a Uboat sink a capital ship?)

I guess that's just another attempt to appeal to a wider, non-hardcore audience. The whole point of a sub patrol is to sink enemy shipping to help the war effort, and maybe you'd find yourself in a lucky position for a capital ship attack... like once in an entire career. But I guess Ubi thought that wasn't exciting enough. Many of the capital ships torpedoed in the Pacific were already crippled by air attacks, so it's also more of a joint operations thing. This should be something the modders can deal with though, if they've left the same campaign hooks that are in SH4.

I'm more worried about things the modders might not be able to touch, like the quality of enemy AI, or to what extent the new "interactive crew" is either a help or a hindrance in managing the boat during an attack. One of the big requests during SH4 days for for a full 3D interior, but I don't remember anyone asking for less efficiency in commands. Not being able to command a crash dive while still on the bridge is just one example.

[SimHq Tom Cofield]

Thanks for the kind words, even with some of the disagreements. I know some of you were worried that this would be a 'fluff' piece based upon my preview. As I said during that little discussion my reviews are a lot stricter than any preview because I don't tolerate bugs nearly as much as I do with previews. I have had several developers not talk to me any more but I call it as I see it.


I agree about the tonnage requirements and the 'rules' for sinking capital ships but I expected that from this game. Unfortunately this is a game, not realism and I knew that to make it interesting it would be a little more target rich than in reality.

I think the campaign structure is outstanding, even with the above stuff. Remember I am a flight sim guy, not a dedicated submariner (although I have been doing this and SHIV a lot more than flying lately) so I compare the game campaign to ones like IL2 or Lock ON and this campaign is damned good. It blows PT boats out of the water (talk about stupid rules of engagement). I haven't met a campaign that couldn't be better but overall this one is very above average.

As for the rest, the game is about as frustrating as it can be for a reviewer. Neil, sorry I forgot to send the copy to you to look over. I thought Doug was going to run it on Monday and was going to have you check it out for major stupid errors but he ran it early and I forgot to send it to you Friday.

If they patch it, and if they do something about the DRM, and once the game is heavily modded then I might just do a re-review of the title. This is a game that could be absolutely outstanding, actually fantastic because the base is there for an outstanding game. Just like SHIII and IV, this is a game that shipped incomplete but unlike SHIII or IV this game has some serious detractions that hurt the game significantly. Luckily a lot of it can be fixed.

[Méo]

Good post Tom :up: ...(and good review too)

I wish you would post more here.

[Onkel Neal]

I think the campaign structure is outstanding, even with the above stuff. Remember I am a flight sim guy, not a dedicated submariner (although I have been doing this and SHIV a lot more than flying lately) so I compare the game campaign to ones like IL2 or Lock ON and this campaign is damned good. It blows PT boats out of the water (talk about stupid rules of engagement). I haven't met a campaign that couldn't be better but overall this one is very above average.

As for the rest, the game is about as frustrating as it can be for a reviewer. Neil, sorry I forgot to send the copy to you to look over. I thought Doug was going to run it on Monday and was going to have you check it out for major stupid errors but he ran it early and I forgot to send it to you Friday.

If they patch it, and if they do something about the DRM, and once the game is heavily modded then I might just do a re-review of the title. This is a game that could be absolutely outstanding, actually fantastic because the base is there for an outstanding game. Just like SHIII and IV, this is a game that shipped incomplete but unlike SHIII or IV this game has some serious detractions that hurt the game significantly. Luckily a lot of it can be fixed.


No problem, Tom, very good review. I appreciate a review that strives to examine the good and bad, and present a reasonable balance.

[Faamecanic]

No problem, Tom, very good review. I appreciate a review that strives to examine the good and bad, and present a reasonable balance.

Overall a well balanced review...and glad to see you didnt take my critique of your review the wrong way :salute:

Neil said it best...it does strike a reasonable balance. Your summation at the end said enough.

Now here is to hoping UBI will surprise us by taking time with the patch!! Something I dont think they did with SH3 or 4...and left both versions half patched (and again my major gripe with SH4 was the final patch was ONLY included if you bought the expansion...which is utter bollocks.)

[thyro]

Quote from last page under "Overall Opinions and Recommendations"

"...Boy, is this a hard game to not recommend..."

Boy is this is not hard to NOT recommend

"...Once players can get past these issues, there is a potential for a lot of fun with this game..."

Of course once the game gets properly finished, once the online idiocricy gets dropped and all large collection of bugs for one unfinished game gets solved, it would become a game. The question is would it become a game or just a demo that only some with a stable internent connection can play.

So your as score for the review 1 out of 5, is preferably to warn protential buyers of a unfinished game rather than say we hope one day all the crap gets solved.

"...There are already some mods released that will correct some of the deficiencies in the game, but the fact that the second patch — the one that is supposed to correct many of these problems — is delayed once again means players that bought the game in good faith are still waiting for fixes that shouldn’t have been in the gold release..."

Is the same to say offer your "butt" and pray for "someone" to have vaseline or spare you from considerable pain... that isn't hope but fait.

But the church of Sh3, Sh4 have revealed that they go deep on the but without vaseline leaving unfinished business.

So you might have hope, good faith but in the end you were raped and still glad to be victims.


"...The game play is good..."

How come the play is any good when AI is more stupid than a snail? If you are happy wasting your money on buying a cripped half backed game then keep it to you otherwise you sound fool of your self.



Review of the Review done!

fool out!

[SimHq Tom Cofield]

Figures, there always has to be one guy that thinks I wasn't rough enough on the game.

Now I know how the Principal felt when he had to sit there and listen to Billy Madison's explanation of the Industrial Revolution.

[robbo180265]

Figures, there always has to be one guy that thinks I wasn't rough enough on the game.

Now I know how the Principal felt when he had to sit there and listen to Billy Madison's explanation of the Industrial Revolution.

Lol - you get used to it in this forum.

I wouldn't let it worry you, I for one thought it was a good review:up:

[Rip]

Figures, there always has to be one guy that thinks I wasn't rough enough on the game.

Now I know how the Principal felt when he had to sit there and listen to Billy Madison's explanation of the Industrial Revolution.

It was a very good review. Don't pay any attention to the detractors. :yeah:

[Noren]

atleast his views of online DRM are the same as mine, look at the second link!

[Nordmann]

Figures, there always has to be one guy that thinks I wasn't rough enough on the game.

That's because they want it repeatedly bashed, day in, day out, with no regard for a fair and balanced review.

It's pathetic really, and you must question whether or not some of these 'critics' even have the game.

[Feuer Frei!]

That's because they want it repeatedly bashed, day in, day out, with no regard for a fair and balanced review.
Agreed on both.

It's pathetic really, and you must question whether or not some of these 'critics' even have the game.

That's half the issue, they have it.
If they didn't, we would certainly have less immature rants.

[Nordmann]

That's half the issue, they have it.
If they didn't, we would certainly have less immature rants.

Not necessarily, there are always unscrupulous people who post negative comments on a game they do not own, and it would not surprise me if this forum in particular had more than its fair share.

[Feuer Frei!]

Not necessarily, there are always unscrupulous people who post negative comments on a game they do not own, and it would not surprise me if this forum in particular had more than its fair share.
Maturity and Respect go a long way, even in forum posting :03:
Sadly, some people lack those qualities (sometimes).

[Hitman]

I actually liked the review a lot (I don't have the game, so I can gauge how informative it was) but its certainly a bit contradictory in the conclussions. Thyro has a point here: After reading the article I was suprised by the ending "It is hard not to recommend it". I don't know if your emphasis on the bugs during the review gave the false impression that there were some non-negotiable deal breakers, or if it was the emphasis on the final conclussions what actually gave the false impression that you liked the game. But there is certainly a bit of lack of synchronization. Other than that, I want to repeat again that it was IMHO a fair and objective review. Coing from an airdale ;), it is a refreshing thing for those of us who are may be too focused an no longer impartial. :up:

[HundertzehnGustav]

mebbe he had a good reason to say SOMETHING good about the game.
like, mebbe his boss told hoim to do so?
and like, mebbe his boss got a new ferrari enzo if the review wasnt totally negative?
mebbe? whonows...

[Nordmann]

Maturity and Respect go a long way, even in forum posting :03:
Sadly, some people lack those qualities (sometimes).

Yes they do, but unfortunately these have been rather lacking as of late. Especially with all the rage, and angst displayed towards those who happen to actually enjoy the game!

[Placoderm]

...Especially with all the rage, and angst displayed towards those who happen to actually enjoy the game!

As well as towards those who do not.

Fanaticism exists on both sides of the issue, unfortunately.


:yep:

[John Channing]

mebbe he had a good reason to say SOMETHING good about the game.
like, mebbe his boss told hoim to do so?
and like, mebbe his boss got a new ferrari enzo if the review wasnt totally negative?
mebbe? whonows...

You clearly are not familiar with Tom Cofield's work or reputation.

JCC

[Akula4745]

If they patch it, and if they do something about the DRM, and once the game is heavily modded then I might just do a re-review of the title. This is a game that could be absolutely outstanding, actually fantastic because the base is there for an outstanding game. Just like SHIII and IV, this is a game that shipped incomplete but unlike SHIII or IV this game has some serious detractions that hurt the game significantly. Luckily a lot of it can be fixed.

What HE said... good review, Mr. Cofield.

[McBeck]

How come the play is any good when AI is more stupid than a snail? If you are happy wasting your money on buying a cripped half backed game then keep it to you otherwise you sound fool of your self.
As far as I understand that is actully historicly correct. Things will change later in the game. Have you played in 43?

[Zedi]

As far as I understand that is actully historicly correct. Things will change later in the game. Have you played in 43?

When we talk about retarded AI, is not only about escorts, is about anything that is AI in the game. Here a quick example.

Convoy stuck after I attacked from the middle of it:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3119/4594186727_5fd117af1b_o.jpg

No comment. Image is resized, but I think everybody can see what's wrong with the AI in the image.. quick hint, the escort was heading toward me on max speed.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4050/4594186751_a201795e6f_o.jpg

These are things that mods can't fix.

[John Channing]

Maybe I am thick but if your point is that the convoy ships scattered after the attack this was not unusual in the early days of the war and it would drive the escort captains crazy. Most of the merchant ships were captained by men who were not used to convoy tactics and had very little dicipline.

It was not unusual for the escorts to have to go chasing after merchants that seemed to be incapable of station keeping even when there had not been an attack. After an attack occasionally all hell would break loose.

JCC

[McBeck]

Maybe I am thick but if your point is that the convoy ships scattered after the attack this was not unusual in the early days of the war and it would drive the escort captains crazy. Most of the merchant ships were captained by men who were not used to convoy tactics and had very little dicipline.

It was not unusual for the escorts to have to go chasing after merchants that seemed to be incapable of station keeping even when there had not been an attack. After an attack occasionally all hell would break loose.

JCC
This book is a good read and it goes into how the convoys started:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Captain/dp/B000OKMBSU/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_9

[609_Avatar]

I think Tom did a good job with his review. I don't have the game but have played it a few times on my brother-in-laws rig to get a feel for it.

[Faamecanic]

Same convoy AI we saw in SH3 and 4.... I suspect the convoy AI didnt get updated because the Devs were too busy coding the effects of Olaf's soup (which is bugged to btw)... :haha:

[thyro]

It's pathetic really, and you must question whether or not some of these 'critics' even have the game.

No need to be pathetic on buying a half backed bucked game!

[thyro]

Figures, there always has to be one guy that thinks I wasn't rough enough on the game.

Now I know how the Principal felt when he had to sit there and listen to Billy Madison's explanation of the Industrial Revolution.

Certainly that always exit a guy that can make a concious decision on not following revision specially when most of the issues pointed out completely differ from the summary at the end.

There are two types of lovers, those that love someone who love back at same level or those that love someone who hit back with just pain. Same to say exist those gamers that are so blind that ignore all the problems just to recommend other gamers to buy crap just because they love a brand.

How can you hard recommend an UNFINISHED utterly bugged game beside the DRM abortion?

Good revision but very bad recommendation!

Nothing personal but this has to be said whatever you like or not otherwise you would add the question here if your revision were good.

happy days! Cheers

[SimHq Tom Cofield]

mebbe he had a good reason to say SOMETHING good about the game.
like, mebbe his boss told hoim to do so?
and like, mebbe his boss got a new ferrari enzo if the review wasnt totally negative?
mebbe? whonows...

First off.

NO ONE TELLS ME WHAT TO WRITE OR WHAT NOT TO WRITE! Not developers, not editors, not site owners. None have ever told me what to write. I have and do ask for input from other people because there are times when I am either mistaken or just plain wrong about something but I am not ever pressured to do one kind of review or another.

As much as some of you would hate to hear it, this isn't a totally awful game. No, I can't recommend it and I don't recommend it. Even without the awful DRM system that is in the game I wouldn't recommend it. IN fact, I made damned sure that to keep as much of the DRM stuff out of my review as possible so I could give a more unbiased view of the game as a game. I ended up writing a long editorial to accompany this review so people would know exactly what I thought of the DRM scheme in this game and in similar games.

But there are things I like. I like the concept of crew management, I like the campaign, buggy as it is. I like the fact that you have to sometimes go to a station to get a full idea of what is going on. I don't like the lack of commands, I don't like the bugs, I don't think they implemented the crew management properly, I think the AI is spotty (just like SHIII and IV) at times and some of the basic things that I expect in a game are missing. I pointed that out but I am not going to write three or four pages of constant griping and slamming.

A review has to point out good and bad parts of a game. Whether you like it or not this game has some good points. It isn't totally awful. After 10 years of reviewing games I know awful, I have played awful, I have reviewed awful. This isn't awful but I couldn't recommend it and I didn't recommend it.

[SimHq Tom Cofield]

Certainly that always exit a guy that can make a concious decision on not following revision specially when most of the issues pointed out completely differ from the summary at the end.

There are two types of lovers, those that love someone who love back at same level or those that love someone who hit back with just pain. Same to say exist those gamers that are so blind that ignore all the problems just to recommend other gamers to buy crap just because they love a brand.

How can you hard recommend an UNFINISHED utterly bugged game beside the DRM abortion?

Good revision but very bad recommendation!

Nothing personal but this has to be said whatever you like or not otherwise you would add the question here if your revision were good.

happy days! Cheers

Thyro, did you even read the review of the game?

I won't bother you to go and actually try reading it again but here is the final part of my review. Let me know how this is a recommendation to buy it.

Once players can get past these issues, there is a potential for a lot of fun with this game. There is a lot of good here and I honestly think that if Silent Hunter 5 follows the series history and is patched adequately, this will be a winner. Sadly, the fact is for right now, I cannot recommend Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic in its current condition.

That is not a recommendation.

[Nordmann]

No need to be pathetic on buying a half backed bucked game!

Here's an idea, don't like it? Go make your own. That way you can cater to your individual needs.

Thyro, did you even read the review of the game?

I doubt it, he's one of the 'evil SH5' rant brigade, reading and comprehension are not exactly personal strengths!

[Nisgeis]

I doubt it, he's one of the 'evil SH5' rant brigade, reading and comprehension are not exactly personal strengths!

I must admit that I did not comprehend exactly what a 'half backed bucked game' actually was. If I knew what one of those was, I could form an opinion either way.

[Nordmann]

I must admit that I did not comprehend exactly what a 'half backed bucked game' actually was. If I knew what one of those was, I could form an opinion either way.

A buck with a half a back, perhaps? No idea what he was going on about either, I can only assume someone's been raiding their 'stash' again! ;)

[thyro]

Here's an idea, don't like it? Go make your own. That way you can cater to your individual needs.



I doubt it, he's one of the 'evil SH5' rant brigade, reading and comprehension are not exactly personal strengths!

Ranting is what you are doing here. If you have nothing to add then please shut up

[robbo180265]

Ranting is what you are doing here. If you have nothing to add then please shut up

http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w181/robbo180265/bongo.jpg

A case of the pot calling the kettle black methinks....

[thyro]

Thyro, did you even read the review of the game?

I won't bother you to go and actually try reading it again but here is the final part of my review. Let me know how this is a recommendation to buy it.

Once players can get past these issues, there is a potential for a lot of fun with this game. There is a lot of good here and I honestly think that if Silent Hunter 5 follows the series history and is patched adequately, this will be a winner. Sadly, the fact is for right now, I cannot recommend Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic in its current condition.

That is not a recommendation.

Dear Tom

No need patronising, ok! I've read it entirely review and recommendation otherwise I wouldn't be bothered to commenting on it. Apologies but I have to disagree with your remarks on the recommendation.

By pre-empting the recommendation with following phase on 1st line, you created expectation on potential buyer. So what you wrote next doesn't really matter, simply because you triggered the impulse on buying the game whatever state it is (its the best game in-depth on the market), when reality is well far from being the best game.

Boy, is this a hard game to not recommend. Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic is one of the more in-depth (no pun intended) games

The graphs are beautiful, the AI dummy shenanigans glitches might be sorted and sometime in the future the half game can become eventually a game. All true with one exception, no one knows the future and meantime another person wasted money on half product to remain on the shelve of being thrown in the bin.

Apologies if I'm being pedantic but that trick of saying good things to ease the pain and then end up disclaiming cannot recommend is a good trick in my view and for this reason only I cannot agree. As overall review it is fine and in some aspects detailed but all that work (to me got lost on that 1st phrase of your recommendation).

I have to agree with one thing... SH5 as good chances of becoming the most in-depth game on the market but not now, not even tomorrow. It will take time, most probably years... well IF IT GETS FINISHED.

Cheers

[thyro]

http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w181/robbo180265/bongo.jpg

A case of the pot calling the kettle black methinks....


:rock:

Ghee!! I wasn't aware that you were Japanese monkey. My regards to the family :rotfl2:

[Bilge_Rat]

Dear Tom

No need patronising, ok! I've read it entirely review and recommendation otherwise I wouldn't be bothered to commenting on it. Apologies but I have to disagree with your remarks on the recommendation.

By pre-empting the recommendation with following phase on 1st line, you created expectation on potential buyer. So what you wrote next doesn't really matter, simply because you triggered the impulse on buying the game whatever state it is (its the best game in-depth on the market), when reality is well far from being the best game.

Boy, is this a hard game to not recommend. Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic is one of the more in-depth (no pun intended) games

The graphs are beautiful, the AI dummy shenanigans glitches might be sorted and sometime in the future the half game can become eventually a game. All true with one exception, no one knows the future and meantime another person wasted money on half product to remain on the shelve of being thrown in the bin.

Apologies if I'm being pedantic but that trick of saying good things to ease the pain and then end up disclaiming cannot recommend is a good trick in my view and for this reason only I cannot agree. As overall review it is fine and in some aspects detailed but all that work (to me got lost on that 1st phrase of your recommendation).

I have to agree with one thing... SH5 as good chances of becoming the most in-depth game on the market but not now, not even tomorrow. It will take time, most probably years... well IF IT GETS FINISHED.

Cheers

hmmm, let's see,

Tom Cofield: respected staff writer and wargamer who has reviewed many wargames, has a reputation both here and at SIMHQ for providing fair and unbiased reviews, who has spent many hours objectively reviewing the qualities and faults of SH5 and written both a preview and a review.

Thyro: does not own and has never played SH5.

Its a difficult choice, but I think I will have to go with Tom on this one...:arrgh!:

[robbo180265]

hmmm, let's see,

Tom Cofield: respected staff writer and wargamer who has reviewed many wargames, has a reputation both here and at SIMHQ for providing fair and unbiased reviews, who has spent many hours objectively reviewing the qualities and faults of SH5 and written both a preview and a review.

Thyro: does not own and has never played SH5.

Its a difficult choice, but I think I will have to go with Tom on this one...:arrgh!:

I lol'd:har:

[mookiemookie]

hmmm, let's see,

Tom Cofield: respected staff writer and wargamer who has reviewed many wargames, has a reputation both here and at SIMHQ for providing fair and unbiased reviews, who has spent many hours objectively reviewing the qualities and faults of SH5 and written both a preview and a review.

Thyro: does not own and has never played SH5.

Its a difficult choice, but I think I will have to go with Tom on this one...:arrgh!:

:rotfl2: ZING!

[RickC Sniper]

hmmm, let's see,

Tom Cofield: respected staff writer and wargamer who has reviewed many wargames, has a reputation both here and at SIMHQ for providing fair and unbiased reviews, who has spent many hours objectively reviewing the qualities and faults of SH5 and written both a preview and a review.

Thyro: does not own and has never played SH5.

Its a difficult choice, but I think I will have to go with Tom on this one...:arrgh!:


+1 :rotfl2:

[Takeda Shingen]

Let's all take a deep breath here.

The Management

[Faamecanic]

Thyro, did you even read the review of the game?

I won't bother you to go and actually try reading it again but here is the final part of my review. Let me know how this is a recommendation to buy it.

Once players can get past these issues, there is a potential for a lot of fun with this game. There is a lot of good here and I honestly think that if Silent Hunter 5 follows the series history and is patched adequately, this will be a winner. Sadly, the fact is for right now, I cannot recommend Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic in its current condition.

That is not a recommendation.

Tom dont take the critics here too much to heart.

Like I said I disagreed with some of your review...but like 99% here I think we all feel your review was fair and impartial.

The sad fact is you (or neil) couldnt list EVERY thing that IS wrong with SH5 or the review would span PAGES and PAGES. That alone says enough about the state of the game (and this would even be AFTER patch 1.2)..

[Salmandra]

Hi there,
thanks for the review, which creates nearly as much controversy as the game
so spot on.. :)

I'm even more thankful about the news i read via one of your links that skiddrow has found a way around this *insert adjective* DRM.

Well happy hunting !! (as soon as i get patch 1.5... a shame i could have saved plenty euro's by buying the game with the future extension)

tchuss



ps : can you add a descriptive of the publisher support around the game, cause man UBISOFT they give us all the finger, day after day .

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Clearly someone who has spent time with the game. Very nice review.

Absolutely.