Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnodayak
Maybe something related to you is "dumb" or "thoughtless", and you may not even know it. Maybe you should apply for the position of a lawyer in Ubisoft company, you are showing show a lot of potential! They probably need at least one ...
|
Give me a break! Now you're taking me for an Ubi/DRM-defender??? I dislike DRM, and have voiced my opinion against it in this forum in several ocasions, not to mention the fact that most of the people I've talked to also hate it and I happen to agree with the arguments they present. But that doesn't mean I support radical destructive desinformed critics, we have a brain for something, not just for insulting without hard evidences of anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnodayak
As far as I am concerned, here's my position:
What you're saying it's something like I am showing you a picture of rotten food, and you are saying to me: "OK, but maybe it tastes good, how do you know without tasting it?"
It's more than obvious that it's a crappy game, considering just a few facts, the first ones that are coming to my mind (and for all of them I have clear and without doubt evidences):
|
You can't compare a computer program with rotten food! A computer program is much more complicated, has more areas that make it "rotten" or not. You're judging just based on a few screencaps and 2 or 3 videos, which don't amount to the complexity such things have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnodayak
- the arcade style graphics on periscope view;
- the lack of shadows of human characters;
- the mandatory connection to the Internet;
- the lack of real time physics, movement and the effect of the wind upon objects or water;
- the level water agitation in ports and pens;
- the flat surface of the Earth;
- the lack of a full war campaign;
- the lack of all playable german subs;
|
1. GUI judging is not a reason. I've said many times now that you can't judge a whole product based on the GUI, which BTW, will be moddable via Python scripts anyways.
2. That remains to be seen in final versions of SH5. All we've seen are preview pics. Lastest build might include those details. Maybe it was excluded on purpose, what do we know?
3. That is a separate aspect from the game itself. There's SH5, and then there's DRM. DRM is crap. But we don't know that SH5 is really crap.
4. Source to prove it? Otherwise, you don't know that for a fact, and are just speculating.
5. Minor detail that doesn't make the overall a crappy thing.
6. Internal programming issue, which I totally understand because of its complexity.
7. Secondary detail for me, and will probably be extendable anyways, just like we could edit the campaign layers in SH3/4.
8. At first, something that I thought was not so good, now I think that it isn't so much of a problem anyways, specially if, like 7, it can be modded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnodayak
Ant the last two of them are probably just a part of a scheme, a "reason" for a potential add-on's or expansions, which means (of course!) more money for them.
|
An expansion of the years 44 and 45 when they've clearly stated that the U-Boot war was already over and lost at mid-43? Doesn't make much sense.
It does make sense to release addons with new boats though, but it's too early to talk about that.
So... got better arguments? Or you're just gonna tell me that I'm an Ubi defender?
