I finally understand why hate SHV and the devs

[ERPP8]

First of all I love SHV.

But the devs did half-do a lot.
They thought: "That's a good feature, I'll tell Brenard to finish it..."
You could see where that would go.
They dove in over their heads and so much ended up dysfunctional.

[THE_MASK]

Hate the devs hey , they are people you know and some of them are like brothers to certain parts of the community .

[SabreHawk]

Well I tell ya, I have seen the word 'hate" used on these forums a might too much. And I think it's time it stopped.
Yes these folks known as the devs are friends of this community and have been for years. They have poured their hearts into these subsims, and if you look around you'll find that they are pretty much the only ones doing this sort of sim. Just how many other WWII Uboat warfare sims do you know of?
You think they have to make SH? You think they just do it for money alone? I dont, cause they could obviously make a lot more making other genres that there's a lot bigger market for. The silent hunter series has a much narrower following than most any other.

No, they do it cause they love it. And I also think that they must have a love for us to keep on making it.
So lets just cut this hate talk ok? They dont deserve that.

[Takao]

Hate the devs? Hardly! They did what they could given the time constraints placed on them by Ubisoft. My wrath is focused on Ubisoft, for not giving the devs the time they needed to produce a quality subsim.

Look at it from another POV. Diablo III was announced several months before Silent Hunter V, however, it is still currently under development with an expected release date of sometime 2011, at the earliest! Also, look at how long Star Craft II has been under development, although some delay was caused by Blizzard having to meet the needs of its thriving WoW MMORPG.

You would have thought Ubi learned their lesson when they released SHIV following a compressed developmental schedule. I guess not... From reading all the reviews and complaints, this game could have used another year before release to the public.

Ahh well, no sense crying over spilled milk. Nor is there any sense in paying $50 for it either.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Takao

Look at it from another POV. Diablo III was announced several months before Silent Hunter V, however, it is still currently under development with an expected release date of sometime 2011, at the earliest! Also, look at how long Star Craft II has been under development, although some delay was caused by Blizzard having to meet the needs of its thriving WoW MMORPG

If you think SHV was going to sell as many copies as Diablo 3 or Starcraft 2 in order to warrant a development schedule as long as those titles, you're fooling yourself. Dev time costs money. Money that will only be recouped in number of units sold. You cannot make that comparison.

Yeah, ya can;t blame this on the Dev team. They did what they could in the time they had. Blame UBI for the DRM and development time.

All annoyances about SH5 aside, I think for such a niche market... we're getting treated pretty good. Lets face it... 'Jim Bob's Redneck Fishing' or the like doesn't look anywhere as nice as SH5.

[DVAFP]

the game is not finished! i'm glad its getting bad reviews, too bad i paid 55€ for half a game.

is this dev team the same that made SH4 or SH3? i had the impression it wasnt

[McBeck]

Originally Posted by DVAFP

the game is not finished! i'm glad its getting bad reviews, too bad i paid 55€ for half a game.

is this dev team the same that made SH4 or SH3? i had the impression it wasnt

Some of them are the same - so you got that wrong.

But the devs did half-do a lot.
They thought: "That's a good feature, I'll tell Brenard to finish it..."
You could see where that would go.
They dove in over their heads and so much ended up dysfunctional.

In this case the devs have done all they could with the timeline and budget they had. Some even worked WAY beyond what they were getting paid for. They poured their time, heart and soul into this game to do what ever they could.

Its comments like this that blame the devs, that makes them think "Why should I spend my time here helping the community?" Devs have spend lots of time in the mods forum supporting the modders....that has stopped now.
Why do you think that is?

[kiwi_2005]

I don't hate the devs or the SHV I love the look of it and the interior just blows me away. Problem is I can't run it! with this online bs, and i wont mention the fix did i just mention the fix! But it doesn't let you finish the missions you can play as long as u wish offline but can't save it!

Get rid of the online option and i'll go back to it or will wait for a better fix to come out. Hey i paid ****ing $89. Why should i get better internet just so i can play this game. Nah either an offline patch or a future fix which ever comes first.

[Feuer Frei!]

The "other" thread's already up to 109, and counting.
Wonder what we'll end up with here.

[Nisgeis]

Originally Posted by Feuer Frei!

The "other" thread's already up to 109, and counting.
Wonder what we'll end up with here.

Eleven, if no one else replies to this troll thread. Take Webster's advice and don't respond to the content. My amp goes to eleven.

[JScones]

Originally Posted by McBeck

Its comments like this that blame the devs, that makes them think "Why should I spend my time here helping the community?" Devs have spend lots of time in the mods forum supporting the modders....that has stopped now.
Why do you think that is?

They must have very short memories then, because Dan has posted here numerous times just today (the last just over 30mins ago), let alone over the last week. So they can't be that upset. But if they are, I'm sure they can speak for themselves, they're big boys.

TBH I'm amazed that a thread that mentions the words "hate" and "devs" in the same sentence hasn't been blown into oblivion by now. At least a thread merge?

[Decoman]

'Hate' is an interesting word. I would argue that it unfortunately means more than the obvious angry discontent with something or someone.

What ought to be the topic of serious contemplation or reflect, is the fact that 'hate' is not really directly associated with 'racism' or 'violence'. Anger or ill will would surely be a more apt description of something emotional or expressive, merely *associated* with the word 'hate', 'hatred' or 'hating'.

I am not trying to be clever here to justify ill will in any way, but a discussion of 'hate' or how we use the variants of the word 'hate' ought to be a serious one, because it seem obvious that once there is a watering down or outright condemnation of the word 'hate', it trivialized and barres something serious. It's like condemning people for being or expressing anger in normal ways.

And one way of talking about a normal way, is to point out the fact that people are sometimes really angry, and it is then of little or no importance that the word 'hate' is used, as if the use of the word as such made people angry.

Now, I tried to learn the etymological knowledge about the word 'hate' and so far, it seems like the noun hate or verb hating is linked to the more common word 'hat'. This link is probably not of great importance, but helps sketching out how words are used, and I would say that this link show an example of how this scary word 'hate' can be said to have a more trivial meaning. Afaik, etymology is useful in dealing with dead metaphors, for understanding the forgotten or also subtle meaning of a what can be said to be a dead metaphor. 'Flower bed' is supposedly an example of a dead metaphor.

So, what I came across some time ago (and I have to believe that what I read is not something just made up) is that convicts (unknown of time or place) were tagged by an item, and without any real explanation of the link between hat and hate, (if I remember correcty) the older word 'hatting' was supposedly used for this event. And it seem obvious that in this respect, that 'hate' might very well be understood as a simple exposition by event or some kind of tagging. Simliar to any common mental processes putting words to context. From this there is the obvious danger of harassing others, if one were to try brand or dispose or exlude someone physically. It is safe to claim that noone presently *really* bothers about controlling thought processes, and I don't see how this will change anytime soon other than influencial or a quasi-manipulative media (like being passively relating to *something* by reading newsitems)(probably simply a question of situational acceptance more than anything concrete), but then there is the unavoidable situations where for example the accusation of a 'scandal' of someone/something would only be sensible by means of various forms of expression. As in flat out saying 'I think this blah blah is a scandal and that you (someone) is to be blamed for it'. The legal repercussions or social backlash of such expressions probably simply vary (for a variety of reasons) with levels of, well I don't really know, but I suppose that a policeman or school teacher is likely to risk some kind of negative feedback rather than some guy on the internets.

Now, given our ability to put words to things, even in anger and simple discontent, *to hate x for something* (any reason really) is not really anything like a crime as such. So I am subscribing to two sensible interpretations when 'hate', 'hating' or 'hated' is used. And these two interpretations or ways of understanding is nothing like the stupefying use of categories. 'Hate' never was and probably never will have a categorical meaning, where the word 'hate' is simply a denominator of an action of attitude, doing or simply an interpretation or condemnation. The attitude part is correct of course, but it would be silly to imply that one cannot or should not be angry with something. There is also something odd by the use of 'freedom' in our days, and it probably does not the same thing for every person. For example, it seem obvious that there is a difference in being free (to do something) and having so called 'freedom'. I am undoubtedly free to move about in my appartment as I wish and what is probably known as 'freedom' has nothing to do with this capacity of me moving about, unless one would argue that my very life is depending on society in not outright killing me (it would be absurd, and it would imply that a state or organization owns me like a slave).

Pheu, this became a long text. The world/life is complicated and I see no reason to always trivialize it.

So if I were to state that 'I hate this or that game' for whatever reason stated or otherwise, there probably is something to it, and I mean it would be wrong to categorically dismiss such an expression on the basis of some kind of hate crime. Apologies for mixing the notion of hate-crime with computer games, but I am really trying to make a point.

In Norway, when one hate something, a common way to express this seem to be something of an understatement, where one would say 'I don't like it'. And I want to change that, at least personally. So far, it seem to me that people seem unable to grasp the nuances in the language, probably a result of the trivial use of words in the media the last 20 years or so. Or they just don't care. Maybe they simply have been thinking that I am complaining and that they don't have to listen or understand it because they think I simply intend to argue. It is really simple to deal with critisism. People ought to make points and they ought to explain. Both making points without explanation, and explaining something without making points is bad. Then it perhaps leads to a neverending argument of definitions and problematics of actualizations.

I suppose some kind of ironic distance is healthy, but I really can't relate to things this way, and I don't want my newspapers to relate to people this way.

Hehe, I would say that I hate the newspapers in Norway. They seem to practice shoddy journalism.

I suppose frequent use of 'hate' is stupefying, but then again, what isn't stupefying when used over again and again categorically or generally.

EDIT: I did not intend to start a discussion, but I just wanted to make a point. There are alot of issues that I could touch upon, but I just want to add here this link to a lecture class at Yale university (US) that ought to be inspiring.
Introduction to theory of literature:

[DVAFP]

I loathe them! I LOATHE them!!!!

[Yosarian]

Originally Posted by Takao

They did what they could given the time constraints placed on them by Ubisoft.

Nonsense, the dev-team make a schedule for a project and Ubisoft says yes you will get this time or not. And when a team of developers do not get this time, they should be man enough to say's no we not do this project. But the Romanian developers do everything Ubisoft(Paris) says, they are not independent, they belong to Ubisoft, they are Ubisoft and have to fear losing their jobs and so will indeed continue to produce crap in the name of Ubisoft and that is the problem.