Wasn't that similar to SH3 in the beginning :roll:. You have to remember SH3 had the benefit of being compared to SH2 :yep: SH4 on the otherhand was not only compared to SH3 but more importantly GWX and other larger mods, compare stock games if you truly want to compare. In my opinion SH4 based on the stock games is ahead.

At the end of the day they are both great games, it was time for the series to go back to the Pacific, that being said the U-Boat add-on will help in making the game go from theatre to theatre fairly seamlessly, which will be great for all involved. There will eventually be something for everybody in SH4.


RDP

you have a good point... but i am comparing stock to stock, sure SH4 looked better than SH3, but in this gamers opinion - thats all she had going for her. I had tons of crashes and bugs with stock SH4... i never had that problem with SH3.

but this doesnt change the point of my post - if SH5 is to be successful the developers need to take it slow, listen to the wishes of the fans and once again leave us with that "wow" feeling.

:up:

Sorry, subsims are a niche market and subsimmers are a rabid bunch who will buy up just about anything put in front of them. The only thing that would accomplish is that they would make the same amount of money as every subsim that came before, except that the players would be much, much happier. But since they buy anyway, what's the incentive to make everyone *really* happy?

The problem that has always persisted with this genre is that there aren't enough buyers who care about it. However, if I were trying to figure out how to make more money at this, I would consider that most subsimmers are probably older and have more money than the average 14-year old Halo player. I also know that standards are high, but if something is true quality, subsimmers will pay nearly anything.

So, if I were to do SH5 here's what I would do:

1. Fix everything technically wrong with previous releases. You know, bugs, multiplayer, etc. Basically, make a *real* game that works.
2. Make all of the character avatars highly customizable for that personal attachment.
3. Add a competitive persistent online rank system (sort of like BattleField)
4. Add an in-game purchasing/downloading mechanism
5. After release, put out a ton of followup content on a regular basis - new boats, more detailed locations, and do micro-sales (new boat for $4.00, new city graphic set is $3.00, avatar skins/uniforms, essentially the SecondLife model.)
6. Improve and support the moddability
7. Buy up user mods, clean and brand them, and sell them through the in-game store. They would still be free through the forums, but this would enhance the installability/support/etc (sort of like how Counter-Strike 1.6 is still free but you can also buy it through Steam.)

The idea here is that by fully committing to the game and offering pricey followup content, it generates more revenue than a typical $50 box game, and the plan would enable the company to justify the additional development effort. Then there's also a real incentive to make and keep everyone very happy, so they stay inside the game and pour more and more money into it, so you have a good reason to make a perfect game from the start that actually works.

This model is already being done to varying degrees in other games, but unfortunately the subsim market is just too small and I doubt they would ever take the risk and invest the kind of effort needed to try this for a niche market.

Minsc

I have little if any CTDs since 1.3, none since 1.4, most in 1.3 were mod related. Many left early on in SH4, they did not give it time to be worked out, they are missing out now. SH4 devs are in the threads there and I believe have listened to a degree. Proof of that is that in 1.4 they used parts of leovampires excellent ROW mod, so folks here do make an impact with their suggestions.

I do see your point, and I am sure developers would like to have more time to finish their product, however UBI at the end of the day makes the decision to launch, it is out of the devs hands.


RDP

exactly. i dont expect it to be perfect in its stock condition - but we have to compare stock to stock, not modded/ patched to modded and patched

this discussion has gone nowhere a hundred times before... so out of respect for you RDP i think it would be fruitless to continue hahaha

i like SH4 now - didnt then

but thats beside the point - whoever makes SH5 needs to learn from previous versions of the game, and what made them pass or fail the test of the end user

I don't know what your point is there, isn't that the idea of a finished stock game, from there modders take over. Problem is, many left after 1.0 or 1.1, when it was unfinished, their loss.


RDP

my point of that comment is that you cant compare patched SH4 to Stock SH3.

i guess in the end there is no end to this discussion because SH4 has a loyal fan base and SH3 has a loyal fan base and then there is a mix who enjoy both.

"east is east and west is west and never the twain shall meet" is a quote which comes to mind every time i see one of these SH3/SH4 discussions.

but back on topic...

If there ever were a SH5, the developer needs to listen to the loyal players and give us more of what we want to see...

more compartments
more ships
more 3-d crew
better command options
global theater of operations
better weather patterns
more in port options
an in port role playing type story line

and the list goes ever onward...

in the end the most successful subsim is going to be the one that includes the greatest number of those fan wishes.

Why can't you compare both stocks, they are the same thing. Neither game was finished out of the box.

We can agree to disagree on some things, I can live with that. Both are great games.

You can create lists, that is a good thing, however they will never be done. Look at 2.0 when it was completed, people still want more and that is ok, we are fortunate to have a series that is so moddable to folks tastes :yep:

Good chat, no harm done here :up:


RDP

You can... im saying that you cant compare one to the other if one of them is patched and the other is not.

agreed :D

EDIT: about the lists... we could always hope that some of the bigger wishes on the list could be included into the next version. but - no matter how good a game is in its fresh from the vine condition... someone can always mod it to be better. which is a good thing.

there is another alternative...

If the game designers cannot spare the time to make the best game possible, or include most of the wish list items,

THEY SHOULD AT LEAST INLCUDE THE SDK!!! :rotfl:

im sure it would make some of the modders lives easier!

If SH3 is not patched, what are these:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sim/silen...tabs;downloads

That said, all the best in 08' GR :up:


RDP

hahaha dangit let me start over :rotfl::rotfl:

take a clean install of SH3 and put it on your computer but do not patch it (even though there is a patch)

take a clean install of SH4 and patch it to the latest version.

you cant compare the two in that condition because one is patched now and the other one is not... you have to compare them to one another when fresh out of the box and unpatched .... (because naturally the patched one will be more stable and have more fixes than the other)

does what im saying make sense now? sorry if i caused any confusion

Were on the same wave length now :doh:, sorry about that. A fair comparison would be the patched up versions, the ones folks play or install mods on, not the inital versions, so 1.4b for SH3, 1.4 for SH4. No one ever plays 1.0 for either version.


RDP

haha its ok... sometimes text is not as efficient as the spoken word :rotfl:

IMO its not about more compartments and 3d crew etc

Its about getting right what they have like wheres the helmsman and the wolfpacks?

A U-boat sim with out wolfpacks ? Games 20 years old could code it and dynamic campaigns...

What about accurate 3d offices and stations. Watch say Das Boot once and theres a pretty basic officer and command room setup. 1st and 2nd + cheif eng + nav + helmsman etc etc or what about getting the command room layout right. Ubi can build all what they did why not build it accurate to start with?

Sometimes less is more imo.

:|\\