IGN's Silent Hunter 5 Review - Page 6

bigboywooly · 03-31-10, 02:46 PM

Fair review

Scipted may not have been the correct wording but I see where he is coming from
Sure the part of the campaign that covers shipping etc is dynamic
Your career path isnt
ALWAYS start in 1939 in Kiel
ALWAYS get the same mission goals to complete no matter how many times you start a fresh career
Scripted
You cant load up the game and think screw 1939 its a cakewalk I fancy starting in 1940 or 41
The script you have to follow is laid out in the campaign choice
Total Germany then Happy times only then do you get a choice Med or Atlantic
And to make a difference dynamically you HAVE to complete all your campaign missions with the wild tonnage figures needed
Yep I know you can free play and ignore all those BUT you still have to play through the career path

Has promise
Just not now

janh · 03-31-10, 02:48 PM

Neals assessment is probably quite correct. In that sense it seems very fortuitous that BIS with OFP/ARMA follows a dual strategy by developing this engine simultaneously as a training tool for govermental organisations (or really hardcore "simmers") in form of VBS, Virtual Battlefield System. That probably increases the cashflow substantially.

On the other hand, other publishers like Matrix afford developing titles that are surely not cash-cows, like WITP-Admirals Edition. But it is also a prestige object for their qualifications, capacity and portfolio. However, stockholder companies like Ubisoft don't appear to care so much about customer opinion and prestige objects, but much more about "big sales titles". So I would conclude that it is a wrong expectation to have that big publishers will be intend to invest strongly into small-market products and provide very realistic high quality sims, strategy games etc.

So maybe betting on Ubisoft is a bad future strategy? And maybe this has been evidenced already twice?

elanaiba · 03-31-10, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigboywooly

Fair review

Scipted may not have been the correct wording but I see where he is coming from
Sure the part of the campaign that covers shipping etc is dynamic
Your career path isnt
ALWAYS start in 1939 in Kiel
ALWAYS get the same mission goals to complete no matter how many times you start a fresh career

You have to admit, in SH3 / 4 they were not more different, they were absent...

Quote:

Scripted
You cant load up the game and think screw 1939 its a cakewalk I fancy starting in 1940 or 41

Have you returned to the start campaign menu after completing a number of campaigns

?

Faamecanic · 04-01-10, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by St. Cobra

Well duh. You are understating the difficulty in creating the game in the first place, for the modders to play with. Anyone can mod an existing game, the hard part is creating the game first.

Give me a copy of Shakespear, I can add a few words here and there, easy!!!

I will refrain from personal attack here and just state that you missed my point.

There are items in SH 3 , SH 4 , and SH5 that have been fixed by mods (heck I have even fixed them myself in SH3 and 4) that literally took 5 min to change a text line in a .cfg file. Those are the changes that should have been made pre-release that I was referring to.

My main point is... things that have been broken, and KNOWN to be broken since SH3 should not have been just copied over into SH4, then SH5... no excuse (Sub on Rails is an example).

Friendly ships that run in reverse and try everything in their power to ram you is another example of something that should have never been released.

And there are total realism sinkers that would have cost ZERO money and budget to get right. It would not have taken any addtional funding to realize that an individual sinking 100,000 tons of cargo in 1939- june1940 was just totally historically incorrect and laughable. Or for a Uboat to be tasked to sink a capital ship as a Mission objective is just stupid. But these are not game breakers.... just things that ruin the immersion.

Personally I would rather have a SH 4 that was tweaked and 99% MAJOR bug free, and 90% minor bug free...that is immersive and complete...then something with broke new features and flashy graphics that I find almost unplayable if not for my love of subsims.

SloppyMk27 · 04-02-10, 12:10 AM

This game is in no where near release condidtion. In my opinion, it's still in it's alpha stages. The points at which you can see where they just stopped working on that part of the game are very obvious. The controls (or the lack there of) are a classic example. AI Ships super colliding into one another or the docks themselves at speed of the downfall of the quality standards UBISoft set for this game. We all know there are countless other things as well. The idea of being able to walk around the sub is a big improvement over sh3 and sh4 where you had your stations with limited manuverability and camera view. I wish I could be more positive about the game. SH3 to SH4 was a big step all around, and I had high hopes that SH5 would have been as much of an improvement to SH4. I was wrong.

I'm in 100% agreement with Faamecanic on his comments. Modding is supposed to be minor tweaking of a game. That is what made SH3 and SH4 so much fun. The modders are not supposed to be expected to fix the catostrophic failures of the game itself. Ubisoft gave us a train wreck. There is a ton of work on the development side that still needs to be done. Once they do their part, modding this game will be the way it's supposed to be. (Tweaking, not fixing disasters)

Claudius · 04-03-10, 02:41 PM

Ubisoft should give up on pc gaming, they represent and actively push the platforms current problems (delayed games, DRM, lazy ports, "DLC" they are a terrible company).

SH3 the Best!!!

MGR1 · 04-03-10, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elanaiba

Have you returned to the start campaign menu after completing a number of campaigns

?

Hmmm

, sounds like Republic Commando - you have to complete each level before you can go back and replay certain sections. Once you've completed all of them, you can jump back and forth at will.

Sorry Dan - me no like that!

If I want to start in '41, I don't see why I should run through a campaign or two before I can do it.

Too restrictive. I'd get burn out and lose interest.

At the moment, I'm glad I haven't bought SH5.

Mike.

Bloomstomb · 04-26-10, 09:33 AM

5.7 is pretty fail.

03-31-10, 02:46 PM	#76
bigboywooly Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Swindon, England Posts: 10,151 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	Fair review Scipted may not have been the correct wording but I see where he is coming from Sure the part of the campaign that covers shipping etc is dynamic Your career path isnt ALWAYS start in 1939 in Kiel ALWAYS get the same mission goals to complete no matter how many times you start a fresh career Scripted You cant load up the game and think screw 1939 its a cakewalk I fancy starting in 1940 or 41 The script you have to follow is laid out in the campaign choice Total Germany then Happy times only then do you get a choice Med or Atlantic And to make a difference dynamically you HAVE to complete all your campaign missions with the wild tonnage figures needed Yep I know you can free play and ignore all those BUT you still have to play through the career path Has promise Just not now __________________ My mediafire page http://www.mediafire.com/?11eoq19bq9r41

03-31-10, 02:48 PM	#77
janh Stinking drunk in Trinidad Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 349 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Neals assessment is probably quite correct. In that sense it seems very fortuitous that BIS with OFP/ARMA follows a dual strategy by developing this engine simultaneously as a training tool for govermental organisations (or really hardcore "simmers") in form of VBS, Virtual Battlefield System. That probably increases the cashflow substantially. On the other hand, other publishers like Matrix afford developing titles that are surely not cash-cows, like WITP-Admirals Edition. But it is also a prestige object for their qualifications, capacity and portfolio. However, stockholder companies like Ubisoft don't appear to care so much about customer opinion and prestige objects, but much more about "big sales titles". So I would conclude that it is a wrong expectation to have that big publishers will be intend to invest strongly into small-market products and provide very realistic high quality sims, strategy games etc. So maybe betting on Ubisoft is a bad future strategy? And maybe this has been evidenced already twice? __________________ Scientific facts are not determined by the opinion of the majority, nor by a democratic vote.

04-02-10, 12:10 AM	#80
SloppyMk27 Mate Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 59 Downloads: 82 Uploads: 4	This game is in no where near release condidtion. In my opinion, it's still in it's alpha stages. The points at which you can see where they just stopped working on that part of the game are very obvious. The controls (or the lack there of) are a classic example. AI Ships super colliding into one another or the docks themselves at speed of the downfall of the quality standards UBISoft set for this game. We all know there are countless other things as well. The idea of being able to walk around the sub is a big improvement over sh3 and sh4 where you had your stations with limited manuverability and camera view. I wish I could be more positive about the game. SH3 to SH4 was a big step all around, and I had high hopes that SH5 would have been as much of an improvement to SH4. I was wrong. I'm in 100% agreement with Faamecanic on his comments. Modding is supposed to be minor tweaking of a game. That is what made SH3 and SH4 so much fun. The modders are not supposed to be expected to fix the catostrophic failures of the game itself. Ubisoft gave us a train wreck. There is a ton of work on the development side that still needs to be done. Once they do their part, modding this game will be the way it's supposed to be. (Tweaking, not fixing disasters) Last edited by SloppyMk27; 04-02-10 at 12:26 AM.

04-26-10, 09:33 AM	#83
Bloomstomb Shore leave Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: new york Posts: 70 Downloads: 105 Uploads: 0	5.7 is pretty fail. __________________ sam

04-03-10, 02:41 PM	#81
Claudius Mate Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Rio Grande, Brazil Posts: 57 Downloads: 35 Uploads: 0	Ubisoft should give up on pc gaming, they represent and actively push the platforms current problems (delayed games, DRM, lazy ports, "DLC" they are a terrible company). SH3 the Best!!!