Silent Hunter Online

[Hinrich Schwab]

No I don't believe that at all, but you're arguing from an emotionally reactionary position where you assume you as a customer have all these rights and ignore the fact that you sign away all that once you accept the EULA. Notice how they all state "You as the end user accept this software as-is"? Legally the publisher has no obligation whatsoever to support the product unless there is some incentive for them to do so, such as maintaining a faithful community. But SH5 flopped so they pulled the plug since it wasn't successful.
You're fighting windmills here by stating these ridiculous ultimatums that UBI fix SH5 for free etc etc. If there was actually any legal ground for your argument, we would have seen a lot more lawsuits from customers against publishers over broken games that were sold and never fixed.
Exactly where did I start discussing ultimatums? Please find the quote where I said this, otherwise stop putting words into my mouth. The issue is integrity, which is rapidly disappearing from the gaming industry. Gamers expect the gaming companies to try and produce the best possible product while listening and conforming with its needs and wants. When a noticeably bad product is released, the negative reaction is forthcoming.

To also counter your argument that negative criticism does not invoke change, look at the incident regarding Mass Effect 3's ending. The consumers reacted very negatively, the producers relented.

F2P is actually a less dubious business model since at least you don't have to pay just to find out the product is broken. And even if you don't pay, enough people will to give the publisher an incentive to fix the product. And if you don't like it, you won't have lost anything other than time.

As for complaining about grinding:

Subscription-based games do the exact same thing, unsurprisingly, since they rely on keeping players occupied for substantial periods to generate income. The only real difference is that F2P in its proper form has microtransactions instead of subscription. Sure, they are set up so as to get users to either pay a subscription or purchase items, but comparing this to dealing drugs is ridiculous: Of course the games will be set up to turn a profit - why else would they be made in the first place?

Now, if we're talking pay to win, that's a different kettle of fish, but free to play doesn't necessarily have to be pay to win.Other than what I have clarified, I see no other reason to continue my direct debate with you. Your stance is just an apologia for the lack of integrity of the gaming companies' in the production of games. Any further discussion is moot.

[kiwi_2005]

have beta keys been sent out yet? :ping:

[Julhelm]

Exactly where did I start discussing ultimatums? Please find the quote where I said this, otherwise stop putting words into my mouth. The issue is integrity, which is rapidly disappearing from the gaming industry. Gamers expect the gaming companies to try and produce the best possible product while listening and conforming with its needs and wants. When a noticeably bad product is released, the negative reaction is forthcoming.
An ultimatum is the implication of your argument, ie: "Make the game the way we want or we the consumers are going to throw up enough of a ****storm that it fails". Now if that's not what you mean then I will apologize. But it comes across like that.

To also counter your argument that negative criticism does not invoke change, look at the incident regarding Mass Effect 3's ending. The consumers reacted very negatively, the producers relented.
Get real. Mass Effect is also a sci-fi institution whose audience is pretty much that of COD. It's not a niche game that sells a few hundred thousand copies. Of course EA is going to listen when tens of millions of customers all over the internet react negatively. Of course UBI is not going to break a sweat when a few thousand people on a single forum are complaining.

Other than what I have clarified, I see no other reason to continue my direct debate with you. Your stance is just an apologia for the lack of integrity of the gaming companies' in the production of games. Any further discussion is moot.
So in other words, you can't beat my argument so you just accuse me of being an industry apologist instead.

Classy.

[Herr-Berbunch]

Of course EA is going to listen when tens of millions of customers all over the internet react negatively.


Forgive me for not reading every post on this thread, are you referring to ME3 with that tens of millions?

If you are then up to three weeks ago sales sat like:

Xbox 950,000
PS3 250,000
PC 100,000

I've rounded up/down a bit, but the total still the industry reported 1.3m copies. I sincerely doubt that over ten times that has been sold since. :hmmm:

[Hinrich Schwab]

So in other words, you can't beat my argument so you just accuse me of being an industry apologist instead.

Classy.

Your argument is constantly weasel-worded to ensure no one can argue with you. Anyone can do that. I am not the only one here who has found your stance less than spectacular. Given your attitude, consumers should not have complained over the problems surrounding Ford Pintos either. :nope:

If you think that means I "can't" beat your argument, so be it. You are locked in your own views and no one can convince you otherwise.

[drEaPer]

The idea seems to be that you get people to play by offering the incomplete, unfinishable game to the public in the sure knowledge that a certain number will become addicted and pay the price just so they can keep playing.




Yep, and before it just had a different naming: Demo, Trial, Shareware with restricted access to content and functions.

Unlike World of Warcraft, Eve Online etc. you do not have to pay 60 bucks after a 14day trial and transfer 15 bucks a month to continue playing.

That is really bad, I see... :hmmm:




Sounds like a scam to me. No, more like a drug dealer.


You can get alcohol if you want it. It is your decision if you consume it.

Your logic: Games should not be fun, when there is paycontent in it, as fun games can be addictive.
Ban World of Warcraft.
Ban arcade game halls.
Ban poker.
Ban las vegas. Its the biggest drug dealer in the world.



A long time ago there was a cartoon strip called The Wizard Of Id. One of the characters once paraphrased Abraham Lincoln, saying "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and that's enough for a good lawyer to make a living."


Blizzard fools over 10 Mio people. They are probably all braindead zombies. I was one of them. And I enjoyed my zombie time. It was a good game, until I got bored and quit. Maybe I am just too drug resistent?


Playing a subscription based game for half a year:

Initial cost: ~60 $, Subscription cost: 15x6 = 90$
-> 150 $

Invest 150 $ in the core unlocks of a western (non asian grinder) F2P and you will have probably unlocked all of the permanent important stuff that you need to fully enjoy the game and even retain some money for those "consumable" things like potions or XP boosts.


Conclusion: You are a doomsayer.

[Julhelm]

Given your attitude, consumers should not have complained over the problems surrounding Ford Pintos either. :nope
Because when you buy a car you don't sign a damn license agreement that releases the manufacturer of any responsibility if the car is faulty. Seriously, can you try to strawman any harder?

[Hinrich Schwab]

Seriously, can you try to strawman any harder?

What do you think you have been doing the entire time your weasel-worded argument has supported the gaming companies, hypocrite?

I rest my case.

[Julhelm]

Whatever, man. It's obvious that you have your beliefs firmly entrenched and are unwilling to look at things with an open mind, so the discussion is moot.

[Jimbuna]

Let us not resort to name calling please.....disagreeing and discussing each others differences is fine but name calling and insults will not be tolerated.

I thank every contributor in advance for their cooperation.

[JohnnyMacintosh]

Sad face.... I was hoping for something more when it came to the next game in the series......

SH3 has GWX but poor graphics, SH4 has nicer graphics but a lesser array of mods, and SH5 was shot in the knee before it ever got out of the gate...

Cant we just have a game thats like GWX with the graphics of SH5 with proper interiors and more than just a skeleton crew?

Oh well... thats the end of my rant.

[Sailor Steve]

Conclusion: You are a doomsayer.
Not at all. All I'm saying is if you have to pay to get the fullest benefit, then no matter how you twist it it's not really free.

[Dowly]

Not at all. All I'm saying is if you have to pay to get the fullest benefit, then no matter how you twist it it's not really free.

This is true.

[drEaPer]

Not at all. All I'm saying is if you have to pay to get the fullest benefit, then no matter how you twist it it's not really free.

So its not a drug, thats a step forward.

Also: What you say is true and the case for all commercially
developed games.

So after back and forth, I think we can come to the agreement, that F2P should be called F2T =Free 2 Test/Try. Like a demo with largely reduced scope.

[Sailor Steve]

Also: What you say is true and the case for all commercially
developed games.
But they rarely tell you it's free.

So after back and forth, I think we can come to the agreement, that F2P should be called F2T =Free 2 Test/Try. Like a demo with largely reduced scope.
So you admit it's not free. That's a step forward for you.

[Ducimus]

Free to play really is a farce. Actually, i take that back, its marketing genius. Some free to play models are better then others. I personally never tried Free 2 play until:

a.) Age of Conan
This F2P model acted more like an extended trial. Certain features were limited that really aids character progression. For example, in this game, certain areas are needed to progress your character - they happen to be premium only. So you have road blocks set up, that either slow you down, or make it agonizing to play without subscribing. This F2P model is very easy to see through. There's no microtransactions, your just deliberately road blocked at certain key areas. It is in effect an extended trial. You cannot progress at certain key points without subscribing.

b.) Lord of the Rings Online
This model, consists of microtransactions. The game doesnt force via road blocks you can't get around without subscribing, instead you buy access to the area via turbine points. These points are sold in lots that come out to like 5, 10, 20, or 50 US dollars or something like that. If something costs 100 turbine points to access, you have to buy like 500 turbine points, being the lowest increment of points you can buy (or something like that).

Long story short with LOTR, they nickel and dime you via turbine points. Need more backback space? That'll cost you. Want access to certain skills? That'll cost you. They charge via small amounts of turbine pionts, id even say each transaction is a pittance. So it doesn't seem like your spending lots of cash - until you start adding it all up. Over the course of 3 months before i got bored and quit, i had spent the cash equivlant of 6 months premium subscripton in microtransactions. So they got twice the money out of me, for the same time period. Considering i'm stingy with my money, that is absolute genius on their part!


Free 2 play is not free.

[Julhelm]

It was never supposed to be free. Like I stated in the other thread, I worked as a developer on a title that made the transition from traditional pay-to-play to free-to-play precisely because it was found that F2P is orders of magnitude more profitable in the long run. Instead of relying on sales you basically get a consistent income and you can stimulate ingame purchases by introducing "new" items that basically take a day or two to implement. While I totally agree that this way of basically reducing the customer to what amounts to a wallet on legs from which you seek to extract money is rather nauseating, you can't really fault corporations for moving to a more profitable businessmodel when their entire reason for existing is to be profitable to their share owners.

[Ducimus]

My main beef with "Free 2 play", is that the name used to describe this sales model, is deceptive and misleading. I'd even go as far as to say it is false advertisement.

[Julhelm]

Well, it is free in the sense that you can download the product and play it for free, as opposed to the traditional model where you buy a disc or download and pay up front.

It's funny how the first proto-MMO's like Warbirds and Aces High were free to download and play offline and only required a paid subscription to play online. If this new SH game used that model I don't think anyone would have complained at all.

[7thSeal]

Guys, you should really learn the difference between publishers and developers. Ubisoft is just paying for this, they are not developing it.

Money is developing it, any way you look at it. Developers respond to those paying them. It doesn't matter how you slice it... money is the knife. Money is spent looking for a quick turn around nowadays. Quality is actually frowned upon as it cost more money for the corporate. ;)

[7thSeal]

Its free

Yeah that motivates people to move in the right direction desired....

[7thSeal]

Alright, the developers should quit and reform as an independent

That has really been the battle for the last ten years, but corporate buys up all the independent as quick as they develop and show a profit. That's what business has become world wide and again business is about money.

Edit\ Surely you've heard the saying before? Everything/Everyone has a price.

[Ducimus]

Well, it is free in the sense that you can download the product and play it for free, as opposed to the traditional model where you buy a disc or download and pay up front.

It's funny how the first proto-MMO's like Warbirds and Aces High were free to download and play offline and only required a paid subscription to play online. If this new SH game used that model I don't think anyone would have complained at all.

I think you mean it's free to try. It's more like an unlockable demo. You don't get the full features of the game until you pay cash, therego it is not free.


And your right, if it used a traditional model, you'd probably see a lot fewer complaints. I think most people who've been around the block a few times know a big steaming pile of marketing manure when they see it. I know i do. :O:

[Gotmilk]

looks like they already have a problem with beta sign up thingy.

That can't be a good sign :nope:

[Julhelm]

I think you mean it's free to try. It's more like an unlockable demo. You don't get the full features of the game until you pay cash, therego it is not free.
Define "free". Like I said before, the whole point of F2P is to generate revenue, so obviously free to play is never going to be "free" as in freeware-free.

You can download, install and play a substantial part of it without having to pay anything, so in that regard it is free. Wolfenstein and Doom both had 10-level shareware episodes that anyone could play for free, as did Quake, and if you wanted the full game you paid the developer. Of course they wouldn't put out the full games for nothing - games are not a charity.

[Dowly]

I dont care for what reasons the dev asks money for the game. If it's F2P, I
expect it to be free.

[Arclight]

Define "free".
Costing nothing; gratuitous
Without charge

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/free


Part of it is free, not all of it. The proper term is "demo". It is false advertising, and people are buying it. I don't know which is sadder.

[drEaPer]

So you admit it's not free. That's a step forward for you.

Hehe, I like your attitude.

So the truth, like so often, is somewhere in between. F2P is a good way of making games accessible, and getting an initial idea what they are about (gameplay, style, etc.) Yet it comes with the inherent danger of creating false expectations, due to a not so fitting naming.
F2P is basically a trial version.
Additionally there is the danger of companies steering away from the fair grond, when it comes to content per $$$. Though that is not a problem of the F2P concept, but purely a problem of the specific product. A ripoff is a ripoff... no matter the distribution channel. This happens to retail games as well.

[Sailor Steve]

Hehe, I like your attitude.
As I said long before, I have no real beef against anything, this just doesn't seem like my kind of game. While I do argue and take sides sometimes I'm always the first to admit I might be wrong.

So yeah, I try to be fair. Try and fail a lot, but still try.

[Nisgeis]

I tried to determine what exactly all the definitions were for online game business models. Turns out, it's quite a horrible confusing mess.

Yep, and before it just had a different naming: Demo, Trial, Shareware with restricted access to content and functions.

Unlike World of Warcraft, Eve Online etc. you do not have to pay 60 bucks after a 14day trial and transfer 15 bucks a month to continue playing.

A time limited trial is what is now called Freemium and is not 'Free To Play'.

World of Warcraft, Starcraft II and DIablo III (when it's released in a few days) are all now on what Blizzard call 'Free to Play' and they have changed the trial from time limited to level capped and character restrictions. Blizzard has to call them free to play, as a it sounds better than Freemium as that implies there is a cost later on. It's sad, but in order to compete on a level playing field, they all have to call their games 'Free to Play' even if they aren't.

-F2P was generally accepted by gamers before it was called F2P, it was called "demo". The purpose of a demo was to get an impression and to decide if you want to buy the game. Of course Demos featured the more attractive stuff, and were visually appealing to lure you to buy the main game. F2P does the same.

I'm sorry to quote you again drEaPer, I'm not picking on you, but you just provided the best quotable material.

This is where things start to get confused. Free to Play is claimed by some to mean literally free to play the game, even if the game costs money to buy. Some Guildwars fans claim that Guildwars is 'Free to Play' as there is no subscription fee, even though you still have to purchase the initial game (and every expansion pack to date). Other places define Free to Play as a game where you don't have to pay a subsription (which leaves the issue of initial price hanging in the air). OK, I'm going off topic with this, but the point is, it's a term that doesn't really mean anything, as it hasn't been strictly defined and there are no rules governing it. It's like saying a mobile phone contract has unliited texts, yet there is in fact a fair usage (limited) quota of 300 texts, or having unlimited download quota on your broadband even though it has a fair usage (limited) quota. You can say it's unlimited all you want and a lot of people will get taken in by it, but it's not unlimited.

Not at all. All I'm saying is if you have to pay to get the fullest benefit, then no matter how you twist it it's not really free.

There are ways of making micro transactions in the game that do not affect actual gameply. For example, you could charge someone a dollar to allow them to customise their sub with an emblem. This doesn't affect gameplay, but is something people would possibly do. Of course there are ways to really screw up the gameplay balance as well and therein lies the difficulty.

Do we know yet what form the micro transcactions will take?

1. Browser based. Really? I didn't buy a beefy rig to play flash or java games in a web browser.

NOTE: That's quoted from another thread.

Unity (a game / 3D application development platform) recently released a version that could cross complie to Flash 11 and I have to say the results were pretty nifty. Here's an Adobe presentation featuring Unreal 3 cross compiled into Flash 11:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywh9KJ7a_Bk

I'm quite indifferent to SHO, as I long ago gave up on all hope that Ubisoft would ever fix SH4 or SH5. I think that a lot of the angst here is a sense of injustice that Ubisoft are making another game when they haven't finished the last two in the series. It's almost as if the feeling is that there should be an authority that can go round saying 'Now listen here, you didn't finish your last two games in the franchise, so you can't start a new one before you finish those other two'. Just like talking to a child who never finishes anything.

I think I wrote more than I was going to. Sorry to bore you all.

[Sonarman]

According to Seeadler's recent translation of the video interview with a producer of SHO....

Q: What does the pay-model look like?

A: Most gamers who play browser games don't pay for anything and that is also our goal but we will have also a pay-model. Paying gamer can not get something that non-paying gamers can not reach, they are only getting certain things faster.


So they are indeed stating publicly that all content can be obtained for free the question then becomes how much grinding will be involved.

What goads me so much as they state mature subsimmers as their primary target audience yet they kept the project super secret till its almost complete instead of conducting market research, asking the community what they thought would make the ideal online subsim.

[7thSeal]

A: Most gamers who play browser games don't pay for anything and that is also our goal but


Nobody has a goal with a but attached... what's attached is the goal. Its just a matter of getting everyone inline.... 'free' is the quickest way to do that.

[kapitan_zur_see]

Seriously, browser and flash based, is this an elaborate practical joke??? http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q258/protectedbyglock/Emoticons/Facepalm14.gif

How can one pretends to develop a serious modern game and subsim at that using this?? I'm suprised nobody here raised another eye brow...

My SH5 data folder indicates roughly 9 Gb of data in it... Yeah, sure, there's mods in :D... can't recall what it was right out of the box, but sure like most modern games something akin to 4Gb +. That's what it takes to make a modern game these days, not much less than that...

Browser based and falsh means NO already downloaded client!! I'm in France and I don't live in Paris. I don't know for you guys here in the US or elsewhere how much can you squeeze out of your internet, but as for me, I'm can't get more than, at extremely best, 400-420 Kb/s. How will you manage downloading so much data as to make a PROPER 2012 3D game working and avoid getting hell lots of loading time without owning a current state of the art internet access??

This cannot means anything but HUGE step backward in terms of graphics, textures resolution, sounds (less problematic), overhaul complexity and immersion factors like interiors, sea states, harbours details and the like. In other words: Silent Hunter The Lite Edition.

Sorry guys, I'm not "buying" this...! Things should always expands and improve as time moves on! not the other way around... This is not SH then to me, period.

BTW graphics looks already like old fashioned SH3 even as it seems without interior and animated crew members. Seriously, if it's back to only close-up still screens of various stations, it won't work for me... in 2012, I think the "ghost ship" syndrome should utterly be a thing from the past!! Totally breaks it for me if it's the case (and it would seems so given the browser based nature).

To guys who are also concerned about immersion factors as much as realism, this doesn't seems to start well... :-?

Yeah, I know... Flash data for the game in cache... alright, what's with cleaning cache processes and stuff? I'm really afraid it can't lead to anything but huge let downs in order to manage downloading times...

And come on... that flash bogeyman SCREAMS memory leaks and CPU hogging performance issues, browser crashes and everything. Not to mentions lags. Seriously, sometimes, firefox even has issues managing multiple tabs with youtube-like or other flash-based stuff in there. Not to mention flash gradually being more and more abandoned by developers and browsers, as it seems to me. Looks like some people seems to think it's to be avoided like the plague, Ain't I right? (I'm no dev)


And you guys raised a righteous eyebrow with modding concern regarding any SH games (though it should less apply to an alleged F2P game), however modding is not just abour FIXING game issues... It's also about expanding the game in directions that wouldn't be possible for devs who are constraints to budget/time management limitations... and that also means a lot in modding, people are working on their free time which is not tied to a budget and dead lines, so they can do more stuff.

For me, a sim with no modding capabilities should be a no go. As for this game, I deem it to be something else then.

After the SH5 debacle, this news even suprised me as to being an even more WTF moment! Seriously... kudos to you guys at UBI who are able to come up with such ideas as a flash based simulation... :haha:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=640&pictureid=5658

[PL_Andrev]

Relax men,
Your internet speed is correct.
This is flash game - a 2D view game with 2D periscope view.

Imagine that ancient Silent Service or Silent Service 2 games were a playable 2D game. This is this same story but with better graphics and level system called "campaign".
:timeout:

[kapitan_zur_see]

Relax men,
Your internet speed is correct.
This is flash game - a 2D view game with 2D periscope view.


WOW! This IS the future! I'm impressed! :D

anyway, it's rather 2D layout with some 3D view you meant :03:
Flash 11 is supposedly capable of higher grade stuff, even such as integrating Unreal Engine 3 which is certainly no small thing. However, you wouldn't be able to use UE3 the way mass effect or gears of war are using it, for instance. Modern looking textures and the like sure would take too much bandwidth...

Anyway, one can see that the real 3D engine used here is far inferior to SH4/SH5 (source: official late periscope screenshot). Hence I find it rather amusing that they display so few actual ingame 3d shots instead of pre-rendered bells & whistle stuff (seriously, the exterior shot using SH5 3d engine making you doubt it's actual ingame render vs the periscope 3d display... :timeout:). Kinda says it all to me...

The whole online idea has always been interesting though regarding a WW2 subsim, kinda like having a "real" BdU, coordinating patrols, compete with other commanders and etc. the game could be fun as a small "from time to time" quick subsim, doing a bit of internet browsing on a separate tab while waiting for contact reports, that kind of thing... Not as time consuming and as immersive as doing a patrol in SH 3 to 5, if you see what I mean. However I think the project would have had a MUCH LARGER appeal should it allowed Uboat vs. Destroyer kind of multyplayer experience. At any rate now, It may just feels like a single player multi-player experience, which, well... kinda negates the usual multi-player idea of getting fun

[Brandon01]

Well love it or hate it it seems that its gonna be here to stay (until UBI looses interest or the player base collapses) either way its free and its not gonna kill us to try it. Just wish they would merge games like they did with Destroyer Command and SH2. Even though SH5 is unfinished and a dog of a game i do like the fact that they put in the VIIA and the SMS Deutschland pre-dreadnought class Battleship. They did a great job on the modeling for that ship given all they had to work off of was a bunch of old photographs and files.

[Ducimus]

either way its free to try

Fixed. :O:

[THE_MASK]

The more i think about this the more it seems like anti piracy . Just make a great finished subsim game and it will sell itself .

[Seeadler]

People should not expect a simulation of SHO, the devs never said they develop a simulation, it will be just a game with submarines :smug:

[Broe116]

I am wroung to think this is along the lines of World of tanks. trying to copy there succes.

XP/gold grind with a bonus if you spend $ to buy xxx

[kapitan_zur_see]

The more i think about this the more it seems like anti piracy.

Cleverly thought. Concordantly, that's also why we can see bizarre, or rather forced through, online contents flourishing in single player game that are not really made for them to happen. Like in mass effect 3 and etc. Online is a "get around" hit to piracy. And not the less clever, for a change compared to cumbersome DRM that are however instantly hacked.

Worrisome counterpart to that, tough, could be the flourishing of half-backed games tailored to browser based experience or the like, literally pushing the concept of in-app purchase too far. See the all too annoying current trend of in-app purchase in iphone games, this time in order to circumvent people getting too much used to pay not more than 2$ or so for a game on this platform... Roxio with their last angry birds iteration have gone too far in that respect for example, regarding their past prices vs. contents and free update with new levels.

[Kaluen Miechiel]

Well i just saw it relax besides im new. :down: thanks for the welcome...
I've been around for a couple of years and have listened to all the pros and cons. I, myself, play SH3 and have been doing just fine with the vanilla mods. However, I've played SH4 and find it to a bit difficult not like SH3 in any way. I've had my share of virus and malware and I refuse to play any game that that has to be played on line. Period !!!!! Kaleun Miechiel

[7thSeal]

Well love it or hate it it seems that its gonna be here to stay (until UBI looses interest or the player base collapses) either way its free and its not gonna kill us to try it.

Try it... yeah its free of course, well which part of the game requires green cash to try it? But you haven't ponied up yet, why? :DL

People should not expect a simulation of SHO, the devs never said they develop a simulationWhy posting on sim forum of the newly highly next experience is welcoming but of what excatly? O wait, I haven't paid yet....

[Sonarman]

People should not expect a simulation of SHO, the devs never said they develop a simulation, it will be just a game with submarines :smug:


To be exact they said (in the SHO FAQ)...

Q: The Silent Hunter games have always been very complex simulations. Is Silent Hunter Online now focusing exclusively on casual gamers?

A: No. The switch to a browser-based game means that Silent Hunter Online will be accessible to everyone, and will therefore remain faithful to the game’s basic concept. While we are always delighted to attract all kinds of new players, Silent Hunter Online is in no way a simplistic arcade action game. The game is geared to submarine simulation fans as well as players who enjoy strategic and tactical naval combat in a realistic World War II scenario. Every battle still requires a meticulous tactical approach, careful preparation and precise execution.

[PL_Andrev]

A: No. The switch to a browser-based game means that Silent Hunter Online will be accessible to everyone, and will therefore remain faithful to the game’s basic concept. While we are always delighted to attract all kinds of new players, Silent Hunter Online is in no way a simplistic arcade action game. The game is geared to submarine simulation fans as well as players who enjoy strategic and tactical naval combat in a realistic World War II scenario. Every battle still requires a meticulous tactical approach, careful preparation and precise execution.
Sound too good to be true...

[tonschk]

The most important thing here is the continued (to some extent) development of a u-boat sim, no matter the area on which the development is made

[7thSeal]

The most important thing here is the continued (to some extent) development of a u-boat sim,

U-boat sim based on a browser.... damn, grab everything you need to hold on to hope? SH5 is alive because of mods... o crap, not supported in the next release of a so called sim.? :timeout:

[Sonarman]

A new screenshot on the SHO facebook page illustrates the flotilla management screen (https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/540655_383726845007287_340571062656199_1094265_129 1304871_n.jpg) ,a first for the series, where you will select between your boats at sea & in port.

The game is actually beginning to remind me more of the classic Novalogic game "Wolfpack" than any of the Silent Hunter series.

[Hinrich Schwab]

A new screenshot on the SHO facebook page illustrates the flotilla management screen (https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/540655_383726845007287_340571062656199_1094265_129 1304871_n.jpg) ,a first for the series, where you will select between your boats at sea & in port.

The game is actually beginning to remind me more of the classic Novalogic game "Wolfpack" than any of the Silent Hunter series.

Kind of reminds me of STO, except with subs instead of starships. Notice the range is listed in statute miles instead of nautical miles? :shifty: :yawn: :k_confused:

[Sonarman]

Notice the range is listed in statute miles instead of nautical miles? :shifty: :yawn: :k_confused:

Unless of course the "sm" they are using the German term for nautical miles "SeeMeile" (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seemeile)

[Hinrich Schwab]

Unless of course the "sm" they are using the German term for nautical miles "SeeMeile" (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seemeile)

It's entirely possible. :) However, considering past iterations, one can see why it is so easy to assume worst-case-scenario. :DL

[TheDarkWraith]

It's entirely possible. :) However, considering past iterations, one can see why it is so easy to assume worst-case-scenario. :DL

with Ubi or anyone related to them you cannot give them BOD (benefit of the doubt) anymore :yep:

[Sonarman]

Whilst I understand and agree with your sentiments entirely, I believe it's a German team so it's quite possible that this is something they got right!:up:

[kapitan_zur_see]

Errr... pardon me if I'm wrong but...
Wasn't a type IIA supposed to be able to go 7 kn underwater and around 13 surfaced??

Seriously, 13 kn submerged and 17 surfaced, that's almost double submerged!! :timeout:
Geared towards simmers...?

Well, one can only assume it's difficulty setting for those more casual players.

[Sailor Steve]

You're right. I didn't even notice that. Those numbers have nothing to do with real life.

[Hinrich Schwab]

Errr... pardon me if I'm wrong but...
Wasn't a type IIA supposed to be able to go 7 kn underwater and around 13 surfaced??

Seriously, 13 kn submerged and 17 surfaced, that's almost double submerged!! :timeout:
Geared towards simmers...?

Well, one can only assume it's difficulty setting for those more casual players.

I missed it too.


Did you see the green numbers in parentheses? They are bonuses from items, apparently. I'd bet good money I don't have that those ludicrously unrealistic bonuses are from twinkies that you either have to grind or purchase.

Calling this a sim is ridiculous.:stare::nope::stare:

[Onkel Neal]

To be exact they said (in the SHO FAQ)...

Q: The Silent Hunter games have always been very complex simulations. Is Silent Hunter Online now focusing exclusively on casual gamers?

A: No. The switch to a browser-based game means that Silent Hunter Online will be accessible to everyone, and will therefore remain faithful to the game’s basic concept. While we are always delighted to attract all kinds of new players, Silent Hunter Online is in no way a simplistic arcade action game. The game is geared to submarine simulation fans as well as players who enjoy strategic and tactical naval combat in a realistic World War II scenario. Every battle still requires a meticulous tactical approach, careful preparation and precise execution.

I'm looking forward to trying it and seeing for myself. Who knows...

[CaliEs]

Seriously, 13 kn submerged and 17 surfaced


Where do you find these numbers? Link?
What i see is course 129deg, speed 5, 8m depth http://www.pcgames.de/screenshots/original/2012/04/Silent-Hunter-Online_01.jpg

[Sailor Steve]

Where do you find these numbers? Link?
Link provided by Sonarman in post #298.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

I'm thinking since its still under development, they likely haven't set the figures like speed and such. More likely they just loaded up what they've got in order to take the screenshot.

[Sbygneus]

I am quite happy someone still makes any submarine games after SH5 failure. Who knows, maybe Silent Hunter Online will be at least funny. I only regret you wouldnt have option commanding destroyer. (Sub chaser vs submarine type of multiplayer game would be :up:

[unterseemann]

13kn submerged, who do they think we are?? Seriously wtf with them??
The characteristics of a type II-A uboat can be found at uboat.net
http://uboat.net/types/iia.htm

It took me 5 minutes to figure them, i think they take some info there ( see the max depth at 492 ft, the 22 crew) and they are not able just to copy them properly... Range is 1600 miles sf (surfaced) at 8knots, and 35 miles sm (submerged) at 4 knots even a six-year old child can do this. And the U-3, the U-791 and U-339 had never been to Saint Nazaire...
And when you read the speed of the U-3 there is a '+12%' into bracket. So with a 0% the initial speed would be a very good 11.6kn. What i want to know now is the speed of a type XXI? 50kn? 100kn? . And what about the torpedoes?? Maybe this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval :DL

When you do a historical sim-game about submarines during WW2, the minimum is to try to stick to reality as much as possible... If you can't or don't want to then leave it and develop angry birds 23 and others childish entertainment for brainless people...
Anyway i return to SH3-4 and don't count on me for this s...
Et c'est mon dernier mot!

[Hinrich Schwab]

13kn submerged, who do they think we are?? Seriously wtf with them??
The characteristics of a type II-A uboat can be found at uboat.net
http://uboat.net/types/iia.htm

It took me 5 minutes to figure them, i think they take some info there ( see the max depth at 492 ft, the 22 crew) and they are not able just to copy them properly... Range is 1600 miles sf (surfaced) at 8knots, and 35 miles sm (submerged) at 4 knots even a six-year old child can do this. And the U-3, the U-791 and U-339 had never been to Saint Nazaire...
And when you read the speed of the U-3 there is a '+12%' into bracket. So with a 0% the initial speed would be a very good 11.6kn. What i want to know now is the speed of a type XXI? 50kn? 100kn? . And what about the torpedoes?? Maybe this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval :DL

When you do a historical sim-game about submarines during WW2, the minimum is to try to stick to reality as much as possible... If you can't or don't want to then leave it and develop angry birds 23 and others childish entertainment for brainless people...
Anyway i return to SH3-4 and don't count on me for this s...
Et c'est mon dernier mot!

It is just an example of the type of player that Ubi really wants; people unaware of the historical realities of u-boat performance so as to be willing to purchase the "upgrades". The Old Gang and the Grognars are not the target of this game* at all.


(* I refuse to call this a sim because of the disregard for obvious historical limitations.)

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Wow, you lot really know how to overreact. :o

[nikimcbee]

Wow, you lot really know how to overreact. :o


Hey Kp, good to see you!:salute:

[Sailor Steve]

Wow, you lot really know how to overreact. :o
Thank you. We try. :D

[Hinrich Schwab]

Thank you. We try. :D

:haha::har::haha::har::haha::har:

[LemonA]

I only regret you wouldnt have option commanding destroyer. Sub chaser vs submarine type of multiplayer game would be :up:
It would be interesting

[Seeadler]

They have adjusted the speed now in a new screenshot

[kapitan_zur_see]

just checked it out... they did, really! lol
On second note, though, they also left the old one with incorrect speeds...
Means two funny things at least: They are monitoring subsim.com carefully it seems, as they reacted quite fast :D

And second, they obviously wants to appeal to us and reassure us :know: whilst not letting down more "casual" stuffs to appeal to others, I guess.

[Hinrich Schwab]

just checked it out... they did, really! lol
On second note, though, they also left the old one with incorrect speeds...
Means two funny things at least: They are monitoring subsim.com carefully it seems, as they reacted quite fast :D

And second, they obviously wants to appeal to us and reassure us :know: whilst not letting down more "casual" stuffs to appeal to others, I guess.

:k_rofl:

So all they did was post a pic of the same boat with the twinkie items,skills or whatever removed to make us think that it was "corrected". I am far from impressed. :yawn: The boost items exist and that is too much for me. No Type II modified or not should compete with a Type XXI for performance.

However, I do agree that they want the community's endorsement pretty bad.

[Seeadler]

They are monitoring subsim.com carefully it seems, as they reacted quite fast :D
No I think they only monitoring their own Facebook page.
In the German version of the Facebook page, a user has written about the wrong speeds in his comment and today the same user commented more errors in the new screenshot :D

[Jimbuna]

No I think they only monitoring their own Facebook page.
In the German version of the Facebook page, a user has written about the wrong speeds in his comment and today the same user commented more errors in the new screenshot :D

That's my understanding/hunch too.

[minispace]

Does the flotilla management screen remind anybody else of the garage from World of Tanks? I wonder if the new SHO will follow that game's model where you can maintain a collection of vehicles and can pick which one you want to take into a battle, or in this case a patrol(?). Some kind of PvP would be a great addition to the game but that would definitely require player control of some kind of surface ships, so it probably won't happen. Too bad.

[Iron Budokan]

Yeah, the twinks are really troubling. Smells of SH5 when you were able to magically upgrade torpedoes and the like to cause more damage. :haha:

Any word whether this game ends in 1943? And will we get to gather armor shards from battleships we sink and turn them in to the local Kiel Warbringer for sub buffs? Will the Trinity be in effect? Will there be Tanks, Healers and DPS submarines?

Okay, I'm being facetious, I admit it. As I said previously I hope the game is a huge success for people who want to play it. But I have seen nothing to convince me it's geared toward hardcore simmers. Which is fine. But don't post pictures of a twinked out MMO submarine and then say the game is for simmers....

[minett]

free maybe but if its going to be arcade based to draw in the wider gaming audience then add ons etc will probs cost and probs lack realism which is what these series of games are normally based on :down:

Would prefer them to fix a game in sh5 that they rushed and released far to soon full of bugs and without the mods on here is a massive epic fail of what could of been a awesome game , imo of coarse guys :arrgh!:

:salute:

[Siegfried von Funk]

Without reading EVERY post here, it sounds like SH5 STILL needs a stake through the heart.

[RAM]

Ok, I'll chime in and give some thoughts. Guess it'd be a long post.

-As for today I still play SH3 and SH4. Games I bought in the moment they were released, and games I had some terrible DRM issues with to the point that I wasn't even able to play SH4 for a whole month after purchasing it.

-Both sims were on the brink of being unplayable when released, with a lot of bugs and prominent UI/gameplay missing features.

-Both sims were officially dropped by Ubisoft before they were anywhere near completed. Once they got the feeling the cow was milked enough, and that sales wouldn't really make them richer, they pulled the plug alltogether and good ridance.

-Both sims I still play because from being almost unplayable stock they have turned into absolute jewels and impressive experience thanks to the modding community.

-The true, absolute and total true is that if the Silent Hunter series has had the success it has had as a franchise is because a handful of totally selfless individuals who undertook (repeatedly in each game iteration) the HUGE task of developing mods. And not minor mods to fix or tweak minor stuff... actual monster-sized mods that totally changed the way the game looked like, sounded like, played like. Go and compare SH3 stock or with GWX3 or NYGM mega-mods. They're totally different experiences to the point to say that SH3 was a GAME (and barely enjoyable or playable, at that), yet SH3 with either of those mods is as close as a WWII submarine simulation as you can get given the frameworks and limits imposed by the code.

-To state what I said avobe in short words: the only reason SH series has been a sucesfull franchise has been the modding community. Plain and simple. Without it I highly doubt SH would've made past SH3, much less SH4.

-as a corolary of the above mentioned statement, one must conclude that the only thing UBI has done for the SH series has been hiring developer teams to create (or in fact, evolve, because SH3 and SH4 are just evolutions or iterations with different scenario settings) the game framework just to sell it and get cash from it, to then pull the plug ASAP and move forward to some other milking-cow project. What has made this series what it is and what has made SH succesful, again, has been the mods. Not the publisher (by far) nor the developers (who I get the feeling have the same reason to be "happy" with ubisoft as we do). THe mods.

-Enter SH5. What they did with that was just unspeakable of. I don't need to mention the reasons, we all know about them here. But then again a bassically flawed simulation with a bassically flawed implementation of an otherwise interesting concept that was utter, total and unfathomable crap on release has been turned into an actually pretty decent, enjoyable sim. By whom?. The modders. All the developers did (all Ubisoft let them do before pulling the plug) was release two patches that did help solving some of the most embarrasing stuff but let the game almost as flawed in 1.2 as it was in 1.0.

-Now we hear of SHO. A MMO game based in a web browser (?). In other words, an UNMODDABLE game per definition. So they're just let the whole reason SH series has been succesfull -ergo, the modders- out of the equation, and we're left in the open, so we can just take what the developers give us (under the ever-prying eyes of the always too-happy-to-pull-the-plug UBISOFT) and deal with it wether we like or not.


-And we get a guy here who tells us to blame the publisher, but not punish the developers for it. While I sympathize with them, dude, sorry, but if you sign a contract with the devil, expect the worst. If you accepted a contract with one of the most outrageously insensitive publishers in the market at anything related to community interaction, you're subjected to go through what you're going here. Noone believes in UBISOFT, hence noone here believes in a game developed under their control area. You sign with an unreliable publisher, you reap the results of what -THEY- have sown for years now. It's inevitable.

-even more inevitable when all those who have made this series what it is now (peaking at SH3/SH4) are a bunch of dedicated guys who are totally left out of the project and will be handcuffed to solve or tweak any mess the developers WILL (and I don't say "might", I say WILL, and I have plenty of prededents to say so, the least of those not being the fact that the whole web-browser concept is bollocks and uncapable of dealing with all the things a proper U-boat subsim shold be able to do) do out of this game.




See, here's a plan to a viable MMO based on the Silent hunter series. Ubisoft should take notes because is the only freakin' way I'm going to fire up anything related with SH published under that brand EVER AGAIN.

-contract a good game developer

-give them SH3/SH4 source code

-Hire the services of all those, or at least the most prominent amongst those, who made GWX/NYGM/TMO/OM/etc. megamods for those games, and those who've shown utter brilliance in turning SH5 from a stinking pile of steaming turd into an actually enjoyable game (Trevally, TDW, Sober, etc...list is long as heck).

-give them a free ticket to get the SH3/SH4 iteration to be able to work into a MMO-iteration, and to work out the details of a WORKABLE, REALISTIC, POLISHED, ---SIMULATION--- multiplayer experience.

-get in the most interesting parts of SH5 (ability to first-person navigate into the submarine), get rid of all its stupid concepts (RPG interaction other than for flavor, magical skills, stupid missions, etc)

-Include some interesting concepts that MMO allow for that aren't workable for offline simulators in (The only thing that has never been implemented in the SH even by the most thorough modding attempts series was...? you guessed, WOLFPACKS!)

-Release the game as a work in progress (fully enjoyable as released, with the promise and perspective for the user of A LOT of new, brilliant, stuff coming integrated into the game as time passes by), cash in a retail ammount of money and then implement a balanced monthly fee to cover costs and make a decent profit out of it.

-Commit SERIOUSLY to the project. I for once wouldn't trust any MMO-related stuff with ubisoft because I know how happy pull-the-plug they are, so there should be some legal compromise in the EULA about a proper promise of supporting the project and development at least for a couple years.


WHO in this forum, WHO, in a mature player target audience interested in serious naval subsims, wouldn't pay at least a monthly 15$ for -THAT-?.


Instead we get a web browser travesty, and depend on the good will of Ubisoft to turn it into- FIRST- a real sub simulator, SECOND- an enjoyable one, and THIRD- one that will last for more than 6 months before they pull the plug.


Sorry, free or not, this BS I'm not trying.


PS: and for the record I'll insist: if the developers wanted to be received with another mindset from the community they should never have done a deal with ubisoft in the first place, and never have accepted such a STUPID, conceptually flawed, implementation for a WWII U-boat based simulator released under the Silent Hunter brand. You signed the deal, now deal with the SERIOUS subsim community not wanting to give UBISOFT a try, nor wanting to deal with an horrendous idea and implementation.

In other words, don't blame us for not wanting to deal with the BS that will inevitably come out of it. Blame the guy who signed over the dots with Ubisoft.


That's all I have to say about the topic. Sorry about the brickwall text I just wrote...I'm just infuriated by UBISOFT, how they treated the franchise and how they ignore the guys who filled their pockets with cash. The modders.

[Iron Budokan]

RAM, you're just venting what a lot of us already feel about this company and the way it treats customers. No need to apologize. :salute:

[Dive! Dive! Dive!]

We have a mind reader on SUBSIM! That is pretty much what I feel about SHO and probably the majority of people on the site! :salute:

[artao]

All I really need to know about this game was in the preview video:
British accents on a German u-boat attacking a British convoy.
<facepalm>
:har:
FAIL

EDIT: Well said RAM. .. however, I, for one, would definitely NOT shell out $15/mo for an MMO subsim. nope. .. you realize that's $180/year to play a game, yes? ... bleh .... MMOs, bleh =]

[Dive! Dive! Dive!]

In the actual game the Royal Navy will speak German :har:.

[CaptainCruise]

Ok, I'll chime in and give some thoughts. Guess it'd be a long post............




Long post or not, it was a pleasure to read. Excellent post.
:up:


"CC"

[Sailor Steve]

Long post or not, it was a pleasure to read. Excellent post.
:yep:

Very well thought out and written. :rock:

[TheDarkWraith]

however, I, for one, would definitely NOT shell out $15/mo for an MMO subsim. nope. .. you realize that's $180/year to play a game, yes? ... bleh .... MMOs, bleh =]

I won't pay any monthly charge to play any game. They're definitely losing out on me :D I will pay a flat fee for a game (boxed version) and that's it.

[bill clarke]

So, I take it we won't get a ship sim from them any time soon