What does UBI has to say about the "patch"

[oscar19681]

I was wondering if we can expect some comments regarding the 1.02 patch. Its quite clear that most fixes are no working. Some people report even worse FPS and other issues. Only a small amout of fixes are actually working and the patch list wasent all that long in the first place. When on the official silent hunter 5 forums somebody pointed out that the infamous missing features were not only missing from the readme but also from the patch itself the mr mcleansy the UK forum manager said.

quote:
Originally posted by Eoweth:

Seems your list was correct and the missing (and absolutely required) fixes are NOT in game.

This is beyond disappointing and a complete failure to address the main concerns with Silent Hunter 5.

**Passing that info back***

See for yourself http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/t...8371057958/p/5
We have not heard anything since while the UK forum manager was quite quick to respond to other issues. But we are left in the dark about the missing features. I,m just wondering if we are getting something of an official statement from UBI or that they just will keep there mouth shut with shame to avoid doing even more damage? or hey! maybe they are all in a search party looking for the " missing features "

[mr chris]

They are mostly likely trying to keep us from adding new units to the game. So they can sell us new units as DLC in the future.

As for there claim pre and post release that this would the most moddable game of the series so far. Well that hardly rings true now does it.

[TDK1044]

Ubisoft as a Publisher really is a disgrace. Look at the history of the Silent Hunter series since Silent Hunter III.

Everyone was hoping for a WWII subsim that would finally rival Aces Of The Deep. What Ubisoft delivered was an unfinished, buggy mess that took 4 patches, heavy modding, and more than a year to make the game what it should have been at release.

With Silent Hunter IV, there was no learning curve. Instead, they allocated a totally insufficient amount of development time, and another unfinished, buggy mess was released.

Now we have Silent Hunter V. All of the above plus DRM and unreliable servers.

Ubisoft; as a Publisher you are a total disgrace.

[janh]

What a surprise... you wouldn't have guessed this to happen with SHV after Ubisoft's previous history, would you?

Well, at least SHIV was patched a few times, though I gather from the subsim forums it was never patched into a satisfactory game state and the last patch was even commercial, you had to buy it with an addon (guess the next SHV patches will also be sold then, he...?)

It is really sad. With SHV, Ubi could really have put a new milestone on the market, that could have boost sales in this genre for another two franchise titles and plenty of DLC in the future. If they had done it well. And allocated the development funds needed. Not cut any of the old and belove SHIII content and features, take a close look at its mods like GWX and realise what customers really wanted, such as wolfpacks, a truly dynamic campaign that could affect the war (save Bismarck and see her roam around later, delay the invasion etc. -- maybe some could be historically unlikely for a single sub, but after all this is a game and you need some goals...). And then add a few cherries on top, like an interior, or maybe a strategic mode where you could play submarine division commander and place wolfpacks, or something new like this.
But instead of using the unbelievable potential, they added DRM and forgot the customers entirely... And on May 19th they'll again claim it's all pirates! Pirates won't buy it, pirates won't even download it anymore...

[Sonarman]

Originally Posted by mr chris

They are mostly likely trying to keep us from adding new units to the game. So they can sell us new units as DLC in the future.

As for there claim pre and post release that this would the most moddable game of the series so far. Well that hardly rings true now does it.

The game is by far the most moddable of the series in terms of scripting. The ability to import older units would have been a great favour to the community by the devs certainly not a requirement from Ubisoft. There is still some question as to whether this is in fact in the patch and the modders are currently investigating it.

We have as yet had no official announcement regarding other patches or the future of the series Ubi's true failure here is that of communication & PR with its customer base and selling their customers short with unfinished product.

[Kromus]

Originally Posted by mr chris

They are mostly likely trying to keep us from adding new units to the game. So they can sell us new units as DLC in the future.

This is exactly what I was thinking about yesterday. With bunch of skilled modders this game could be made till 1945 easily and all high detailed subs/interiors in a few months...

[Drifter]

Originally Posted by janh

It is really sad. With SHV, Ubi could really have put a new milestone on the market, that could have boost sales in this genre for another two franchise titles and plenty of DLC in the future. If they had done it well. And allocated the development funds needed. Not cut any of the old and belove SHIII content and features, take a close look at its mods like GWX and realise what customers really wanted, such as wolfpacks, a truly dynamic campaign that could affect the war (save Bismarck and see her roam around later, delay the invasion etc. -- maybe some could be historically unlikely for a single sub, but after all this is a game and you need some goals...). And then add a few cherries on top, like an interior, or maybe a strategic mode where you could play submarine division commander and place wolfpacks, or something new like this.
But instead of using the unbelievable potential, they added DRM and forgot the customers entirely... And on May 19th they'll again claim it's all pirates! Pirates won't buy it, pirates won't even download it anymore...

After lackluster sales of SH4, I think that Ubercrap knew that SH5 would be the last of the series. They obviously kept SH5 development and productions costs to an absolute minimum so they could maximize profits and milk the title for all it was worth before putting the series on the chopping block. And they obviously don't give a damn about burning the last remaining Silent Hunter customers by releasing a half-finished, buggy game, and then dropping support for it soon afterward. Ubercrap as a company is a failure, and SH5 as a game is a failure. The writing is on the wall for them.

RIP Silent Hunter series. And good riddance, Ubercrap. You won't be missed when you're gone.

[theluckyone17]

I liked where SH5 was going:

• the first person interface
• having to walk/run from station to station
• being able to converse with the crew, and have it mean something
• the graphical improvements.
• ability to modify the scripting

I don't like that they removed/atered other features:

• the missing commands and "basic" functionality in the UI
• the broken stadimeter
• SH3/SH4's method of managing the crew (the whole crew, not just my officers)
• limiting the war to '39-'43
• the FPS-like "goal/mission" patrols

If Ubi had kept the "oldie but goodie" stuff, and implemented the new innovations... SH5 would have rocked. As it is, I'm feeling like it needs a few more patches, a lot more time coding, and a lot more time modding before it's going to live up to my expectations.

I fear that it won't get those patches...

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by TDK1044

Ubisoft as a Publisher really is a disgrace. Look at the history of the Silent Hunter series since Silent Hunter III.

You never played SHII? It was the worst of the lot. Actually as far as bugs go it wasn't too bad, and it had the advantage of adversarial multiplay with Destroyer Command; but it was shackled with a 'campaign' that consisted of a series of shooter-style missions that you had to complete before you could advance to the next one. Die? You could start at the beginning or redo the mission. Fail to complete the assignement? You would do the mission over until you got it right. And when you had completed all twenty-one missions you were done. Start over and it was exactly the same.

SH3 almost had something similar.

[Faamecanic]

Originally Posted by TDK1044

Ubisoft as a Publisher really is a disgrace. Look at the history of the Silent Hunter series since Silent Hunter III.

Everyone was hoping for a WWII subsim that would finally rival Aces Of The Deep. What Ubisoft delivered was an unfinished, buggy mess that took 4 patches, heavy modding, and more than a year to make the game what it should have been at release.

With Silent Hunter IV, there was no learning curve. Instead, they allocated a totally insufficient amount of development time, and another unfinished, buggy mess was released.

Now we have Silent Hunter V. All of the above plus DRM and unreliable servers.

Ubisoft; as a Publisher you are a total disgrace.

You forgot to mention that SH 5 also included KNOWN bugs from both sH 3 and 4. Bugs that modders fixed FOR FREE in both versions, without access to the source code.

Again.... I cant excuse the Devs for this... for allowing bugs from the previous 2 versions, that were fixed by MODDERS, to be allowed in SH 5.

[Faamecanic]

Originally Posted by theluckyone17

I liked where SH5 was going:

• the first person interface
• having to walk/run from station to station
• being able to converse with the crew, and have it mean something
• the graphical improvements.
• ability to modify the scripting

I don't like that they removed/atered other features:

• the missing commands and "basic" functionality in the UI
• the broken stadimeter
• SH3/SH4's method of managing the crew (the whole crew, not just my officers)
• limiting the war to '39-'43
• the FPS-like "goal/mission" patrols

If Ubi had kept the "oldie but goodie" stuff, and implemented the new innovations... SH5 would have rocked. As it is, I'm feeling like it needs a few more patches, a lot more time coding, and a lot more time modding before it's going to live up to my expectations.

I fear that it won't get those patches...

Well said.....agree 100%. I dont understand how they could have had such good ideas, be fed by the most involved fan base (subsim), and screw the pooch so freakin bad.

[Iron Budokan]

Originally Posted by theluckyone17

I liked where SH5 was going:

• the first person interface
• having to walk/run from station to station
• being able to converse with the crew, and have it mean something
• the graphical improvements.
• ability to modify the scripting

I don't like that they removed/atered other features:

• the missing commands and "basic" functionality in the UI
• the broken stadimeter
• SH3/SH4's method of managing the crew (the whole crew, not just my officers)
• limiting the war to '39-'43
• the FPS-like "goal/mission" patrols

If Ubi had kept the "oldie but goodie" stuff, and implemented the new innovations... SH5 would have rocked. As it is, I'm feeling like it needs a few more patches, a lot more time coding, and a lot more time modding before it's going to live up to my expectations.

I fear that it won't get those patches...

Totally agree. I also liked the direction they said they were going at first. Too bad it wasn't very well developed, because like you said, this game would have totally rocked if that were the case.

[JScones]

"What does UBI has to say about the "patch""?
They'd say "Pfft, we don't need to say anything. We got your money, now P off back into the corner, where you belong. Until, of course, we release our next exciting new game where we hope you totally forget about your present experiences with SH5 and blindly put your hand in your pocket again."

Of course, this would be in German and posted exclusively on the German forums...three weeks after being asked.

We moan that the game is unfinished.

We moan that the patch is taking too long.

We moan when the release date is put back again.

We moan when the patch is released.

*FACEPALM*

[JScones]

We moan when others moan.