Burn Witches! Burn!
 

As there are many threads laced with slams towards the Romain Devs,
I'd just like to say a few things.

I don't really care much about the state of this Game so far.
I have this feeling that it will all be good someday.
Much like SH3.

I don't feel I got burned by getting the Game.
I expected MUCH worse!

And delays of patches means little to me.
I know they are working on them.
I've met Dan, and I trust him.

I can joke with him about things and he understands that I joke.
He also listens and cares more then many of you can see.

I'm sure the other Devs do also.

We only harm ourselves by placeing pressure on them
and questioning thier intents.
Put yourselves in thier shoes for just a month!

I doubt few here could even come close to what they attempt!

Yes, they are under some extreme pressure!
Both from Ubi higher ups, and worst of all US!
We should be supporting the Devs!
Not stabbing them in the back!

Flame Suit is on!

Regards!

Blaming devs for the shortcomings of a product is about like blaming soldiers for losing a battle.

i agree. honestly i have had a great time with sh5 so far. i have had a few annoying bugs, but nothing game breaking. i also have not had any issues with the drm. whenever i have wanted to play it, i have. i notice most of the people who complain dont even own the game! all i know is that there is far more than one in every crowd. :know:

Well, in all fairness?
You can blame Soldiers for loseing battles.
History proves that if you care to look.

You can also say Soldiers have won battles that they never should have won.

Not a good example haveing been in situations like that myself.

I dont blame the developers for this pile of sea snot. I put 100% of the blame on the publishers.:know:

And even drm is removed later winning one batlle does not a war make

Definitely of interest to me. I did a quick google search of "soldiers were to blame" and ended up with the same (fairly humorous) theme.

When were the soldiers to blame (and by soldiers I really am refering o the lower ranks) for losing a battle?

The old saying, Foward they cried from the rear!! and the front rank died.

I don't really blame the devs. They've made us some beautiful and amazing games, but in all fairness they have shipped a game made nearly unplayable due to bugs then failed to meet two promised patch release dates. As nice as they are and as much as you trust them, that's a pretty poor performance. Especially since at this point, we don't have any idea when the patch will be coming.

Combine this with the completely unacceptable level of quality, and poor support and utter lack of communication from their publisher Ubisoft and you're starting to get into pitchfork and torches territory.

Combine all of that with the most insane and Draconian DRM scheme ever, and... you get where we are today. :cry:

So, love them or hate them, the cards are stacked a mile high against the devs. Patch 1.2 needs to kick some ass and get into players hands very quickly or I doubt you'll see the community turn around much.

And they have the experience of the SH4 development (some even from SH3) which bugs and flaws may occur in such a project and that the estimated schedule not fit but they make the same mistakes over and over again.
Either they appreciate the schedule always wrong or let it extremely shorten by the managers without protest. The studio in Bucharest is not an independent studio, it is Ubisosft and as Ubisoft they have to accept the responsibility for the game.

good reply.

Ultimately the blame goes to UBISoft for releasing a game in such a terrible state, if the developers said that it was ready then the developers are to blame! However, what I think is that the developers are under such a strain of pressure from the producers (higher up) that they give the go ahead knowing it's not ready but don't really have a choice in the matter, it must get frustrating when they are told to "wrap it up" for release!!:damn:
Even the patches can only go so far, and like any workers they're not going to work for nothing!!:hmmm:
Well that's just a guess but probably not far from the truth, IMO!:-?
PS. And the type of DRM is totally the produces decision!

Generals vs Soldiers is too simplified model...

Devs are not children, they are more than capable to explain their internal relations:

"1) Ubisoft is a company, of which Ubisoft Romania is a part. Please stop separating the two. Not everything that is good is our merit, not everything that is bad is "the suits" fault. I, of all people, have my parts in the failures of SH5. The people "high up" could have simply decided not to do another SH, just as you guys can choose not to buy."

Oh, they have accepted the responsibility for the game. :DL But that's Dan posting on his own, I haven't seen anyone else from Ubisoft corporate be that honest---actually, I haven't seen anyone else from Ubisoft period. Their only official communications have been patch notes and announcements. No one is keeping us updated officially with what's happening.

The odd thing is that Splinter Cell was pushed back several weeks to "polish it" and just today R.U.S.E. was pushed back to September to make it better. Given the state of SH5, wonder why that didn't happen here since SH5 is obviously the black sheep of the Ubisoft family given how much attention and press it's gotten, ie none.

Good brain usage...

As I said before... m a y b e it was "offline" GWX4 that should not take place of "DRM baby"... if it was announced for October2010 ?

Flame suite is on!

Just out of interest, I would love to know the following, obviously I never will but it would be nice to know:

How many developers worked on the game
What was the production budget
What time restraints were put on the developers
What was the development budget compared to the marketing budget
What is the budget for further game development
and
How many devs are still working on the game post release


I think if you answer these questions, you will know who is to blame for the condition of SHV