What would you prefer, when a game is published ?
 

I have already said somewhere else in this forum that the discovery time of a new game is UNIQUE and MAGIC. Now, it is often turned to a time of frustration and deception. Then after, instead of simply playing the game, you become more what I call a "customer-beta-tester". When finally, you can start to really enjoy the game, maybe after several months of patching, moding, etc... you already know the game like the background of your pocket and start already to think about the next version, probably with the secret hope, this time you will be able to really enjoy the discovery of the next version.

Would you return to a theatre 6 month later, to watch again a comedy or a drama, because the first time you went there, it was totally bad played, with actor not knowing their text and parts of the story simply missing ? Certainly not.

You the gamer and organization like Subsim, have the power to change that and the only way is to boyicot game which are obviously published that way.

Why ? Because publishers understand only the following words: Money, turnover, income, benefit, deficit. To my view, the policy Subsim apply now, which is in fact like many other similar forums, just help publishers to apply more and more this disrespectful attitude. This is obvious, because it allow them to reduce the risk, when they launch the development of a new game or new version of it. What is bad for a publisher ? It is to see the development budget not being held. So if they know they can publish the game, even if it is not finished and then wait to see if the starting turnover can justify the development of patches, they are happy.

Why SH3, after patch 1.4b was left in a state obviously still unfinished and with several well known bugs still not corrected ? I am personnaly convinced, it was just because of economical reasons. So beware, that one day will come, where you will not get any patch. The day when publishers will have pushed the ball a bit too far in this dangerous game, the day when casual gamers, which are not idiots, will not buy the game because too much bugs, too much unfinished.

Some will object that if publisher have to take too much risk, they may decide to not launch the development. Yes, this is a risk. But personnaly, I am convinced that if a potential maket exist, soon or late, somebody will take the risk to grab it.

The day simulation games will become marginal, in term of potential maket, this day, the genre will be abandonned with absolutely no soul state by the publishers, no matter the way it was going with the process of developing such a game.

ACS

You always get a smart ass!
 

Let me think .... This is a hard one ..... I know .... For it to work!:lol:

I have to agree with this post. It seems that UBI is trying to increase profits by seeing how far they can push the limits of casual gamers by releasing games that are more and more unfinished and untested. Even casual gamers have limits.. whatever that may be.

You got it sport! Funny thing is, 'economical reasons' could mean either:
- they got enough money from the sales and they thought there's no more market for it even if further improved
- they didn't get enough money so they didn't bother.

I don't necessarily believe they didn't get enough money since they started SHIV...:hmm:


That's a bit unrealistic. Simulation games will always appeal. Let's admit it though, eye candys improve the whole thing a lot. Otherwise we all should be playing Dangerous Waters (my favourite, but with abysmal graphs). It's the graphics that require a lot of work to get it right. Plus you need some brilliant minds to create realistic AIs, then wrap the whole package and optimise for the casual gamer with his budget PC.

This is a purely personal opinion: UBI-Ro was originally created for console games. They're bright guys, but they're not necessarily sub buffs. It's just a job for them, remember that. And I'm assuming Ubi-France is not paying them a lot (since they're working in Eastern Europe - still EU allright, but just). Guess you get what you pay for, given the time frame.

The economical reason, to my view, was "enough free patch now, user will have to pay for the further improvements" and they started what became now SH4 (don't forget that initially SH4 was supposed to be an expansion pack for SH3).


I really hope you will be right, I love simulation games !

ACS

So...you're accusing Subsim of promoting buggy games or what?

What is the point of this contentious poll? To invite more whingeing?

Hopefully not..
I believe the message is: Stop releasing games with so obvious bugs?

I approve with ACsoft`s opinion here. Even I have a limit, ofcourse, you guys are allowed your own opinion and are fully within the right to speak out.

So I might just as well grab my right to my loud opinion and critisism right now. And atleast be given the honour to ask: Ubisoft, Why did you release a game with such obvious bugs and flaws? (TDC Stadimeter.) (In-Game resolution un-changeable as well as other graphical features like HD-Bloom effects and such.) (DUD torpedoes and No Damage even tho both of theese are turned off.) (Crew members of sinking ship simply dying flat on the spot just before the water reaches them, life boats spawning 50 yards away instead of a loaring animation..)

Other then that, if I may add, the game looks great, and I haven`t given up on it, and am far away from boicotting it. I am just merely, by humble opinion indeed, pointing out that ACSoft has a point here, just as much as many had the right to boicott SH3 because of Starforce, people do have the right to boicott SH4 because of both bugs (Mentioned above.) and feature problems (Lack of historic knowledge: Lancaster bombers?? No Akagi class?, etc etc.) I could live with the Lancaster, but not without the Akagi (We are in the pacific Gentlemen.)

As said, I am looking forward to the patch, when I can use the TDC without bug`s, that is what I call atleast a good start :) And I am with no single intention trying to undermine Ubisoft directly, and do feel free to correct any/all my bug statements so far, I am not sure whether or not I got them right.

Ur friend in the Pacific Ocean.

Red Hammer

i would prefer alot less cry babies.


get over it, you choose to play pc games. ive been playing pc games for almost 13 years now. I enjoy it very much, yet understand the flaws that come with this hobby from day one.

botom line is, if you dont like the game, please dont slam it in a negative way to detract potential new comers to a great series, over such minor things as AA in a game. the gameplay is more important in the end, and that's what this franchise is secretly known for.
also for all so called sub fans, who stoped pre-orders, or just flat out wont buy the game because of early rumours, lack of AA, some minor bugs on launch, please go away. your not real fans. PLEASE.

not buying the game only hurts the dev team, and gives ubi one more reason not to support them again. the lack of funds received possibly by all the cry babies who wont buy it now over trivial things, also depresses the dev's, if the projected numbers arnt going to at least be 45% of what they expected, the devs probably wont see any other reason to continue on with patching the game also

give it time

/end rant, im drunk and going to bed

So you're saying that people like me should buy this game even thought it's a beta? Ok, Do I get a discount? I mean, I can't honestly pay a full price from a product that is incomplete.

I have loved subsims ever since the SH1 and I'd really like to support these kind of games but supporting half-finished products isn't the choice. I already had to be a beta tester for SHIII!

Ive played pc games since `93 as well. Doesn`t make me get better insight in why buggy games are released more then anyone else here, since the question about how buggy sh4 is, is seemingly regularily asked on several forums and occasions. I saw no obvious bugs in Das Boot game, Silent Hunter 1, (Old games.) etc, etc. But again, I did not play SH4 for a long time until I myself discovered the main flaw (TDC stadimeter). Hence, your point is humbly noted :)

but if you take a further look at AC`s posts here he never once critizized the lack AA and all that eye candy which was seemingly promised, and in fact, me neither, I was just merely pointing it out, and specifically said it may be corrected by anyone ? ;) I donno about other`s, but my DE stays right here no matter what. But still, a point to be well taken, the game devs did promise some AA unless I am mistaken, and as far as I know they DID promise higher in-game resolutions. But that does not bother me. Allthough would be nice to have :)

If alot of people, by some reason(s), don`t buy the game, and SHIV sales goes down as much as 55% of the original anticipation of the Dev`s, I wouldn`t say they shouldn`t stop patching the game, on the contrary, I beg to differ Sir, I`d say they have a rather large OBLIGATION to take a look at what is going on in their game dev offices. But again, my humble opinion :)

The people you seem to call cry babies and graphics/eye candy lovers, are customers just as you, with a different point of view then your`s. I think that`s indeed NOT what differs Silent Hunter fans from wine glasses. In total, Off topic, I wouldn`t say it`s a good idea to interpret different people`s well deserved right to sceptisism by calling them complainers and cry babies.. Alittle On-Topic again, I dont know about others, but calling some new forum member a ****(W/E) or **** (W/E) Just because he cancel`s his pre-order until further information, thus he get`s the bad impression of the game. I Would be calling: Aiding to the problem of which I believe you so nicely put as: Hurting the dev team. But then again, I am far from being an expert, let alone an analyzer. So do feel free to correct.

S! to all and have a good day.

Your friend in the Pacific

Red Hammer

I can accept a new game to have some teething problems. However, I do expect it to be operational right out of the box.

Every piece of software developed has functionality requirements (individual stuff it is supposed to do). Software should not be released until all the functionality is complete. This does not mean that the program has to be perfect but pretty close.

For a video game, functionality includes being able to play the game. Maybe the graphics need tweekin or sound needs to be modified but the game should be playable right out of the box.

It is my opinion that some of the game developers are pushing this functionality requirement accountability a bit too far in the "bad" direction.

I would have a great deal more respect and loyalty to a software company that was honest and upfront and informed me that the release date has been pushed back so that the product can be delivered with full functionality.

I bought the budget edition of Silent Hunter III, patched it up and had a great time from the start, with no bugs. If it had been as buggy as SH IV I might have given up on it, and missed a great game. So yes, I very much prefer to get a finished game right away. Also helps me do my job, as I'm a gaming journalist :-).

Yup. It was me who voted No, but only because 'No, by all means!' was not an option.

I guess it's just that my expectations, or demands if you will, are not as high as some of the submarine experts which allows me to just have a lot of fun and be able to live with a glitch or two.

Hell, if I didn't read about them here, I could very well miss some of the so called 'major flaws' in the game, just because I didn't know any better. For me ignorance is truly bliss, without a doubt.

When facing the (admittedly very real) possibility of encountering a few bugs every now and then means I can have SHIV (or any other game that interests me for that matter) a lot sooner instead of having to wait until it's finally 'done' I'll take my chances and would love to have a go. I don't have a lot of money but placed the pre-order on SHIV without thinking about it twice and when it's here I'll be a very happy sailor.

Seems to me that from everything, everything, I'm reading SH IV is both playable and easy on the eyes right out of the box. Where there are issues, it seems to be, that we're talking about very technical stuff that only hardcore hundred-percenters, or people with monitors at least four times the size of their heads, would be worried about. There's no reason to think that won't be addressed in a patch, at least the worst of it.

In a perfect world we'd have perfect games. Times are different. PC games get stuck with a smaller market and simulation games represent an even tinier chunk. Is it a shock that somehow, for some reason we don't know about yet, that this might be a premie? A little premature? Doesn't mean it's not a cute kid. Doesn't mean it might not grow up to be a quarterback or president someday. But right now let's give it space and let the doctors do their work.

Until we know, if we ever do, why things happened as they did jumping to conclusions about the reasons and pointing accusatory fingers at everyone and ranting on and on about the unfair harshness of a cutthroat captialist economy isn't going to make things better.

For the vast majority of non-hundred-percenter gamers, SH4 may well be the first and best subsim they ever play. Most all of the bugs won't even touch 'em. Why scare 'em off? Isn't making your point once and, having vented and/or constructively shared your insights, enough?

Others have said this before and maybe better but just take a deep breath. Consider the history of sims, especially the recent history, and remember why sims aren't huge. We need two things more than any one detail in any particular product: developers and customers. Now, I'm not saying to cheerlead. If a product is a real stinker let 'em have it. But, really, is SH4 that? Remotely that?

If people are moaning, repetatively, is it really because they feel so greviously, personally, wounded or is it because they're the heroic standard bearers for a greater and more glorious future for simulation gaming? I dunno. Could be it's because they like complaining. Otherwise they'd either patiently wait and see what's down the road in terms of mods and patches or just cut their losses and play the games already out there which do meet their criteria of perfection. My guess is there just aren't that many of the latter...