Long live SH3.
SH5 won't see a dime from me.

.


I have a very very very old 8800GT video card and this card dont have problem with the Dynamic Shadows of Silent Hunter 3





http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/7258/sh5a.jpg

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z58/tonschk/fop.jpg





http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z...Ib_shadows.jpg

Im seeing explosions that explodes and lots of other issues (bow sprays when ship no moving!!!)

i like the water and details on the uboat and interior looks great

can't wati for videos showing 100% realisnm attack on a ship

Eye candy looks real nice how about substance??!

hmm...:hmmm: I hope that the dynamic campaign will not be driven by some sort of "big picture" script, so to speak. Meaning I will have to patrol to the US coast, later on to madagascar WHEN Sh5 do force me to, like if you had limited patrol area triggered by scripted historical events. I want to stay patroling around the british isle, should I want to, from beginning to end of the campaign.

On the other hand, it wouldn't be so much of a strange things, since a soldier do have orders and that he can't ignore them and go wherever he rather wants to... The concern will be for the replayability though! Same applies to the crew having a past and a background, thus pointing to the fact that it could be likely you couldn't choose & change them inbetween patrol or even from the start. Problem is, after multiple careers, it will somehow be experienced as if you were watching multiple times the same movie, on and on.

Kind of a bold move from the devs, it either pays off or partly ruins the game sense of freedom. I'm also a bit scared as to ennemy forces overreacting to YOUR personnal uboat, as if you were the only one fighting in this war, sending the whole fleet (a manner of speaking) after you just for the sinking of one isolated merchant ship like there was no other threats in the battle of atlantic to care of. Just speculation, however...:03:

No other uboat types and end of campaign at 43 is also a bit worrying! the types VII better be detailed to quite much greater depths than the multiple subs in SH3! not just by throwing more "accessories" to "buy" and the full interior and that's that, because it won't pays off, I can tell you lol

As for the dynamic shadows, I guess they were put off for the sake of FPS as if my memory do not fails me, this question as been addressed already before, isn't it? Sure in this video, it shows to which extent it can "breaks" downward beautifull graphics and render them far less realistic and immersive!

To the ones who think people are complaining too much: don't forget what recent PC Game Releases have brought to us. We have seen titles which made us all go "wow!" when seeing first screens and videos because we had previous titles in mind with better graphics, just to find out that gameplay was extremely simplified and that the whole pourpose of the developement was to create an awesome graphics engine and some minor features to fulfill the promises on the CD case, like "responsive" "dynamic" or "realistic" things.
Shortly after release the flaming starts: too short campaign (having aWW2 subsim end in 1943 is the "simulation-way" of a shooter end after 5 hours of playing), too simplified gameplay with great graphics detail but little options and stupid AI.....at the point the game is playable enough by upgrading hardware and following patch releases for one year or something, the gameplay itself is worn.
...compare IL2 Birds/Wings of Prey to the Original IL2 Sturmovik Game, or Operation Flashpoint 2 to the original OFP from 2000.

These is no reason to believe SH5 is ´going to change that trend. The market is looking for top selling numbers and in most cases games that can easily be adapted to other platforms, with all limitations brought by this They don't WANT us to play a game for 3 years because it's great, we wont buy another one then.....and of course developers are monitoring communities...."OK, they wanted wolfpacks in Sh5, we give them wolfpacks and remove the last two years of the war to compensate the workload!"
They only have a limited budget (= working time ) based on statistically calculated purchases.
We don't even know yet what additional features have been removed to implement others that can be better advertised. Imagine the game not having possible dud torpedoes for example...

Apart from the programmers and designers there are ubisoft buisnessmen, who look at marketing statistics and then say "c'mon, don't waste your time on this or this....enough people are going to buy this game anyways because its a sequel AND WE NEED TO RELEASE IN MARCH or your contract is GONE!" - "but subsim is interviewing us next week and they WANT all these features!" - "Then use your rethoric imagination!"

Everything that is done is commercially exploiting our hopes for a great game, which according to market scientists renew in a certain time after the last disappointment. The only way of getting a real oustanding detailed subsim in the future will be a large-scale open source project.....as sad as it is....

I just don't get the point of the "sacrifice quality for the sake of profit"-idea....whats all the money worth to you if all the things you can buy with it are s**t.

Hmmm...:hmmm:

I may be adding 2+2 to get 5 but I would be interested if anyone else get's the impression that the dynamic campaign starts off in Germany, Lets say Wilhemlshaven, cos thats where the VIIs were based in 1939, then you get ordered to attack British shipping around the Western approaches and around Scotland.

After 1940 victory over France you get ordered to Lorient or St, Nazaire and after a bunch of patrols on the Western Approaches you get ordered to take you VII through the Gibraltar Strait to the Med.

Nice and understandable from a role play perspective, but TBH if I want to stay on the Western Approaches then can I? If I want to start in the Med can I?

I would like to have confirmed whether the campaign is a one start deal or whether you get to choose at least the date that you start and further which flotilla and therefore which base you come out of with the historical restrictions around the dates?

Yes I still haven't seen any rough Atlantic sea yet, gad wouldn't it be awful if it was Med only with no storms!!:nope:this has been avoided on all videos, if this is supposed to be modeled after Das Boot it's a failure!:oops::cry:

The supposed dynamic campaign is starting to look like a SH2 scripted campaign!!:-?

-Right Reece, simply avoided... :nope:

-Can't imagine simulation released in 2010 to be played in 2011,2012... without dynamic shadows ?!?

Still hope it would be implemented as advanced graphic option...
:ping:
I thought that Neal would ask few questions on graphics... besides antialising

I read that right? Only 250 convoys throughout the all campaign? That is enough for the Atlantic between 1939 / 1943?

Unfortunately I think you may be correct.:shifty:

In reading the second part of the interview, (My opriginal post was done before it was visible), I am know taking a slightly more negative view than I first held.

Whilst I understand a need to put limitations in the game to reduce the development, I think the lack of options as to what you are able to do will make the long term playabiliy of the game somewhat limited.

If my 2+2=5 sum is anywhere near correct it is sounding a bit like CoD in a U-Boat. I can't remember the last time I played any of the CoD series but because I got to the end of each of the campaigns in the series I kind of stopped playing the game. MP FPS never really grabbed me as a genre although running through the "campaigns" solo was OK for the times but only the once. The scripted nature of the CoD campaigns meant that those games got a run through (about 1-2 weeks max given my limted available time to play them), then they got de-installed and shelved as I'd "finished" the game.

SH3's sandbox approach however means that I'm still playing it years after I got it when originally released. For mine that's the kind of game I want to spend $90-$100 bucks on not one that gets played through once or twice then gets shelved.

Oh hell, you all are getting me worked up too. I should have the freedom to start in Wilhelmshaven in '39 and then branch out from there. If I'm directed to the same grid squares and transferred to the same places as the war goes on, I'll be quite peeved. What if I don't want to be transferred to the Med? Am I going to be sent to the Atlantic air gap in one career and the Western Approaches in another career and then the Med in yet another? That I can live with. But predictability will be the end of the line for this game if that's what they're going for.

I think a complete repair and upgrade of SH3 would have been a better (and cheaper) option for Ubisoft.

I'm hoping that it is more than just being able to influence which way the script goes. The random element around your missions makes it far more interesting and engaging. Not knowing what to expect, but also after playing a while knowing where to look for traffic is a great part of the fun of SH3 for me.

Having a scripted campaign will mean I buy it play it then shelve it, unless some great mod comes along to mean I get more out of it than it looks like from the interview.