SH6? :har: Anyway, If they used SH5 as a base, then they should go back and fix fundamental flaws in the game engine they should have fixed before using SH4 as a base for SH5. This problem will only be compounded when using SH5 as a base and adding more features to an already flawed foundation. Not doing so is shear idiocy IMO.

Silent Hunter 4 was not Beta Tested in the true sense of the word....at least not by anyone at subsim. I was one of the Beta Testers on SH4, and we were not working with a full Beta version of the game. It felt like a very early version of the game. The Beta Testers were involved way too late in the process to have any impact, and I can think of 4 issues that I flagged that were still issues when the game was released.

In all fairness, 3 of the 4 issues were addressed in later patches, but on another game I Beta Tested for another publisher, we were involved much earlier and with a real Beta version. That game was much healthier at release. :)

Was that Settlers 7? I know they released a public beta prior to release. I'd be keen to know from anyone involved whether that made a positive difference to the final product?

I know it has been said to death, but I completely agree that we have seen the last of the Silent Hunter series. :cry:

No, Sir. :)

At least from Ubisoft. :dead: But a different Title from a different Publisher. :hmmm:

Yeah? Who? :88)

Well, if the devs are as serious about the genre as those who have met Dan would have us believe (more than we could ever imagine, I believe it's been said they live and breathe it), and completely blameless insofar as its release state, then why don't Alex, Dan and the 50-odd SH5 devs break away from Ubisoft, form their own independent company and find another publisher more sympathetic to their cause (maybe 1C perhaps)?

I mean, many people here are quick to claim that the devs would have given much more if only the evil oppressors let them, so here's the perfect chance to match actions to words. :up:

Unless...

I can relate to that.

Its easy to be mean, but you know very well its not that simple. And to be honest, maybe for some of us enough is enough.

Blameless we are not, and I've said it before. In the grand scheme of things I'm probably the one who should be blamed a lot, simply because at my level of experience i should have been able to influence things to go the right way and prevent some of the mistakes from happening.

I personally find little to blame in the publisher/ubi suits.

Of course, I know very well - I was there - that many mistakes were not mine, but a team is a team. In the end we propose a product to you and it represents us all. Short schedule, instable code, inexperienced programmers, that doesn't really matter to the end buyer.

Its our responsibility what we put on the market with our name on it.

.
 

Well said Elanaiba. Probably splitting off as a separate company holds great rewards, but also great risks. Under cover of Ubisoft, you can still get through with a bad seller or two, but on your own, any risks become "much riskier".

Hmmh, I think after SHIII and SHIV, the Silent Hunter Series was at a turning point. And the general decision, whoever made it, to go for mass market and casual gamer audience just appears not to work with this type of game. It may never have been the hard-core "game" (simulation, whatever) like Falcon 4, Jane's Longbow or so, but I don't think that any of those games feature topics that are enticing to a general audience. My impression is that kiddies just go for quick fun action with shallow learning curves these days, and are scared off by something that might relate to closely to reality, and where you could even learn something.

Have you ever considered doing the exact opposite, and focus on the actually "tiny" customer ship of this genre by going into the premium market? Say SH(x) would cost a good $80 from now on, and that would allow you to spent 4-5 years working on any sequel so it really comes out polished, bug-free and with really new content -- that content and those improvements, that your customer ship was really asking for. This will not get you any casual gamer that just looks for a quick game on a Saturday afternoon, but I am quite confident it would have worked with the people in this community. Maybe that is something to think about?

EA? :woot:

Dan, I think you might have misunderstood the intent of my comment. :hmmm: My comment was meant to sound silly and illogical, to highlight the silliness of "I've met Dan, he's great and loves subsims, so the devs are not to blame" comments that are posted here by the same few every so often (thus my reference to "those who have met Dan would have us believe" and "people here are quick to claim" rather than direct reference to you guys). Of course we, and other objective people, know such comments are rubbish and too simplistic. Just like you guys leaving and forming your own company. Some of us understand that there are more important things in life than subsims, such as a stable income for providing for family and so on.

And that was the point I was trying to make. ;)

But thank you for your comments. You have my utmost respect for your open acknowledgement of your contribution to the product (which you first made months ago), even though I'm sure others here will continue to stick to their "it's all the suits' fault" mantra...

I agree that the 'suits' that everyone blames are possibly something of a mythical entity.

But why is it 'silly' to say 'he is a great guy and love subsims'?
Regardless of the outcome of SH5 and his own accountablilties and flaws - that statment needn't be rubbish on its own merrit.

Here is another angle on this matter:
Every time some one praises Dan or defends him, you seem pop up to brand them as a fanboy etc.
Surley you can understand that by repeatedly doing this, it makes you look no less opinionated?

You keep refering to yourself as 'objective' but in your seemlingly persistant quest to tackle the extremists, are you sure that you yourself have not wound up as one at the other end of spectrum??

Because that is how it is starting to look.

It's not silly to say he's a great guy who loves subsims. I've no doubt that's 100% true. It's drawing the blind conclusion that because he's a great guy socially, who enjoys a drink or whatnot, that therefore anything wrong with SH5 professionally can't possibly be his or the devs' fault (heck, Dan is but one of at least 50 people involved with SH5).

See the difference? ;)

That's what is silly. Not at all what one thinks of Dan as a guy to have a drink with.

Look at it this way - you might think I'm a jerk...does that mean JSGME or SH3Cmdr sucks? If you said "I've met JScones and I think he's a jerk" then fine. If you then added "so JSGME and SH3Cmdr must be rubbish", there's the silliness (or fallacy, to be more exact).

It you look at my posts, this is what I comment against, not what anyone thinks of Dan as a person.