Sorry to jump in again but...

Not everyone has the internet to quickly patch the game to v1.3 A review is based on the product out of the box. The review was too positive in my opinion. Silent Hunter IV, Dark Messiah of Might & Magic, Heroes of Might & Magic V were all rushed to get a quick buck. All games released through Ubi-Soft! Then again, the reason why Silent Hunter 4 received a better review then the above mentioned games is, because the reviewer saw potential in the game. With the right patches, fixes, and mods the game could be and is now being appreciated by the vast majority of people. To be honest, It was dreadful when it was released. The only thing which worked for me was the tutorial and even then that had its' discrepancies - such as being able to use radar when you clearly could not. Even though it is alot better now, with the v1.3 patch; you still need the Merchant Fix(Mod) to really have a more complete game. Sorry but I disagree. I say 'No'. Think about it, if we revised all the reviews of all the games available, then well...do I really need to say more? Other games don't get the newly patched reviews, so why should Silent Hunter IV.

If I'm looking at reviews in order to make a decision on whether it's worth it to me to get the game, then I whole-heartedly want a current review which is based on the latest patch so I have a fairly good idea what I'll be getting at that particular time. So to keep a Publisher on its toes, its important that reviewers need to make it clear to us clients what version of review we are getting. I think having that clarification will hopefully keep the incentive to prevent games from being released unfinished, like SH4 was, as long as we can get reviews at time of release as well as after each subsequent patch.

Of course it may be unrealistic to ask for that because of the time and effort which may be needed for some companies to keep up with all the changes, but that's my two cents worth anyway.

That's probably not an issue for many people reading a review on subsim.com :up:

But you do make a good point that it's probably a good idea to mention the size of the patch, and also the fact that you might very well want to install some of the amazing content mods (graphics, audio, radio) which can be pretty hefty, too.

Well, I think other games should get updated reviews based on patches. While I do understand the feeling that "patching it after release isn't acceptable", I also think it's better to reward publishers when they do decide to allow the developers more time (i.e. spend more money) to improve an already-released game. Mentioning in a review that the release version 1.0 sucked and isn't worth your money, but the patched version will blow you away and is worth every penny, seems IMHO to strike a nice balance.

I think if the gaming community as a whole refuses to acknowledge the improvements brought about by patches, then publishers will still release games before they're ready; they just won't ever bother touching them after release. They'll focus more on hype before the release, misleading demos (if they have a demo at all), and basically hope they can trick enough people into buying the buggy game to make enough money to make the whole thing worthwhile. Marketing people don't understand the technology: they see what looks like a playable subsim, and they say "what do you mean you need another 6 months? It looks finished to me! Release!".

It might also be worth noting who the originator of this thread is. Who knows; maybe if the Powers That Be at Ubisoft read an updated review which says it's "almost perfect, except for a few small problems with unmannable guns, unrealistic depth changing behaviour, and ..." they might decide to give the developers a bit more time to polish it with a 1.4 patch, in the hopes of earning a 10/10 (or 9.9/10, at least) review. Or they'll green-light SH5, with a more realistic schedule. It's hard to imagine a scenario where improving the public perception of this excellent sim would be a bad thing.

Or as Rockin Robbins said, it's time for the carrot! If you only ever use the stick, they'll just learn there's no chance of pleasing you and not to bother. No more subsims ever, because the market demands absolute perfection upon release, but is way too small to make devoting the resources needed to achieve that goal viable. Especially when you could just churn out another by-the-numbers shooter or real-time "strategy" clickfest and be guaranteed a profit.

The problem that I see here is that once you create a precedent for 'Reviews' after patches, then the original 'Review' becomes meaningless because everyone just says "well let's wait for the AP (after patching) Review in a few months."

The message that sends to the publishers is that they can safely underfund their projects, and then patch them to varying degrees after release and then be judged on the patched game.

To me, this is not the way it should be. How would any of us feel buying a new novel, only to discover that it's not really finished and that the publisher will mail us the corrected segments of the book over the following three months?

Silent Hunter 4 should have been given an 18 month development schedule, not an 11 month schedule followed by three patches with a diminished Dev team.

Because of the quality, integrity and talent of this Dev team, and because we have excellent modders, SH4 is now a very good game indeed. But my original point stands; any video game should be judged at the time of release when most people purchase it, many of whom know little if anything about patches and mods.

TDK,

I think you just wrote the post-release review! Well done!:up: Yes its unacceptable for publishers to bring a product to market in this shape. On the other hand I just got into Sub-Simming earlier this year. I had heard about the Sub Sim forum through the SimHQ webpage and curiousity being what it is I purchased SH3 and began my new addiction! Suffice to say, that through the work of the Mod Community I am now an avid Submarine Commander. So the post release reviews do add new folks to the community. I ended up purchasing two copies of SH4 and now continue to have a great time with both SH3 and SH4.

Cheers!

Wilcke

Good point, Wilcke. Glad to have you with us.:D

Haven't you heard of the new "PC Games AP" magazine? Comes with a CD enclosed with all of the latest patches and the AP reviews. :yep:

Just kidding :lol:

I think you may have predicted the future, geetrue. :D

Actually. if my fading memory serves me, this was they way it was done in the past. I seem to recall that both Falcon 4.0 and Janes F-15 (or was it F/A 18) had patches that came on cd's that were included in some of the magazines.

JCC