My vote really does go to SH2, for the simple reason that patches and mods turned it into a very fun game, especially multiplayer, but nothing will ever fix the fact that it is nothing more than a series of missions which never change, and there is no real campaign at all.

There is hope for SH5, but SH2 was, is and forever will remain the absolute dog of the series.

If somebody think a woman is ugly, fatty and disgusting, do not make sense to waste his time going to her hause just to tell her that she is ugly fatty and disgusting ,because is better to go to the hause of a nice and pretty woman ,If somebody is enough idiot and stupid to waste his time going to the hause of the ugly fatty and disgusting woman just to tell her : she is ugly fatty and disgusting obviously is because have a second hidden intentions

.

I'd like to know what people think are the top five games in the Silent Hunter series so far, in no particular order.

This is just a guess:

Silent hunter 3
Silent hunter 3
Silent hunter 3
Silent hunter 3
Silent hunter 3

:haha:

I'm in the same state of mind.

Really, it tells more about them than about the game.

Isn't this a rhetorical question? You would better ask: How much more disappointing than SHIV was SHV?

You see, I can't vote in this poll, as I never played Silent Hunter 1, so I am not qualified to answer this most serious of polls. I have also not conducted code reviews of even those games of the series from SH2 - SH5, so I am unable to even comment on the number of bugs in each game. Also, on a purely quantive versus qualitive view, does more bugs equal less quality? I don't think it does - a light bulb simulation that has a light bulb and an on/off switch could have one bug, but that's different to a complicated game, where the more things that are modelled, the more bugs there could be.

Still, the average subsim user knows this and wouldn't be pulled into voting in a poll, for which they were not qualified to judge. I am heartened that in less than six hours, no less than 30 people have performed code reviews on all five of the series, which they owned and have managed to vote. But what does this poll of nothing more than number of bugs tell us? That SH5 is the most advanced of the series? SH2 didn't have a bugged dynamic campiagn after all... but is that because of good luck, good judgement, good testing, or omission? Is less bugs the new yardstick for advancement?

As usual, very good points Nisgeis. :up:

But apparently, after more than 100 days after the release, some folks still need to vent...

No, it's not. Rhetorical questions don't require an answer, whereas this poll is a scientific poll asking all those who are fully qualified to know, having examined all of the code of the SH series games, which was the most bugged.

Hey! Get your own poll and stop trying to hijack this one. But your question is completely pointless as it is not at all quantitive or qualitive. For example, if you had a poll that asked 'How much more disappointing than SHIV was SHV?' then I would answer not at all, as your question was biassed and badly worded and was not trying to gauge the reception of SH5 turthfully. I could have had such a low expectation for SH5, after having received SH4 that I was expecting a box that went bing and did not CTD as the ultimate subsim after SH4. But your poll question would not catch this point of view. Such a shame, as your poll question would not have captured why the respondents had given that answer and would not really be of any benefit to anyone at all. Would 'not at all' have been one of your poll options?

Now, on with the expert code analyst views for the current poll.

Issues in form of bugs - I vote for SH2 ...unforgetable Janus-Errors!!! :D

Issues in form of never getting the right feeling of playing a WWII subsim, with the main focus on simulation - I vote for SH5!

As JC and Tak both said, it tells us nothing that hasn't been said many times before. So I'll tell you something that those of us who have played them all for many many hours (well, except for SH5, but I think my answer is different than you might expect in that category).

The best game out of the box was SH1, no question. It had a dynamic campaign equal to AOD's and practically no bugs at all. You can talk about how dated it is, but that is true only if graphics are what you play the game for (and I fall somewhat into that category, preferring SH4 even though it is somewhat less complete, especially out of the box).

SH2 didn't have a dynamic campaign at all. As I said earlier, that in itself is the biggest bug of all. All the luck, testing and judgement could never erase that flaw. If you died in the third mission, you started over at the beginning or you started over there. Same campaign, same kaleun, same mission. And that was adjusted somewhat by some redesigned campaigns, but the basic flaw was still there.

And SH3 was almost the same, except they got so much flak when they announced it that they ended up delaying the game six months to correct that. It ended up having problems, but most of them have been corrected. Not all, but most.

The biggest complaint about SH4 was that it kept SH3's bugs and added a few more of its own.

And now SH5 seems to have a lot of those same bugs. The naysayers are right on that account - those things should have been fixed by now.

Graphically, yes. Walking around the boat? Yes. But with half the campaign and only one boat to do it in. Is that an advancement? Is it really a bug? As you say, I'm not qualified to judge it because I haven't played it. But the flaws have been exposed by others, so I'm in a position to at least judge whether I'll buy it when they finally let me.

And I will. The bugs and flaws didn't keep my from liking the others, and I'm sure I'll like this one just as much. I won't condemn it out of hand like some do, but I also won't praise it blindly like some others.

So, out of the box:

1. SH1
2. SH3
3. SH4
4. SH2
5. Can't possibly rate SH5 of course, but someday I will.

Modded:

1. SH3
2. SH4 (but limited by lack of mods)
3. SH1
4. SH2
5. Again can't rate SH5, but it has a long way to go and I fully expect it to end up at #1.

@ tonschk: Your 'woman' analogy strikes me as odd. It seems to me that you like being seen with the pretty woman and talking about how beautiful she is, but you avoid the fact that she is very limited in both intelligence and conversation. It looks to me like you're overwhelmed by beauty and nothing else matters. Maybe you don't have anything else to talk about either?

BADDEST not real word Tarzan. Even Gorilla know word you look for is worst. Bad, worse, worst. Might seem like a confusing way to run a language, but English is an amalgam of many languages which has evolved over centuries whose grammatical rules have only (relatively) recently been codified. Somewhere in that process of evolution badder and baddest missed the boat.

I'm sure he knows that. Sometimes us gots to have our slangs. :D

Used to play sh2 vs destroyer command against my old boss. I can honestly say i don't recall much of it though. as far as release issues, i can say i had numerous issues with the starfarce anti piracy crap with sh3, and the game itself (unpatched unmodded) wasn't very fun. Didn't come into sh5 till after 1.2, so i really can't attest to its level of fail at release, but at 1.2 its playable (though far from challenging) Mods make it much much better, and it will only improve from there.

Worst out of the box I've played was Airport Tycoon 3... dang! Wrong website, sorry. :oops: