Contract Of Common Sense

razark · 08-21-09, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Contact

Now you have totaly confused me, so now you say you want to buy sh5 ?

My first post was satire. Sorry if I was too confusing. My point is that if we don't support the series, the series will die. If the sales for SH5 are not strong, SH6 will never be produced. If sales for SH5 are not strong enough, patches will not be produced. The company will find other things for developers to do instead of supporting a game that nobody is buying.

Therefore, it is in our interests to purchase SH5, even if it is not as great as it could be. Personally, my interest lies in the Pacific with the fleet boats, but I enjoy WWII submarine warfare. I'll play a German u-boat simulation if it's done well enough. If SH5 doesn't do well enough to support future developments, I'll never see the series return to the Pacific.

Razark

Sailor Steve · 08-21-09, 12:33 PM

Excellent points, and well made!

08-21-09, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by razark

My first post was satire. Sorry if I was too confusing. My point is that if we don't support the series, the series will die. If the sales for SH5 are not strong, SH6 will never be produced. If sales for SH5 are not strong enough, patches will not be produced. The company will find other things for developers to do instead of supporting a game that nobody is buying.

Therefore, it is in our interests to purchase SH5, even if it is not as great as it could be. Personally, my interest lies in the Pacific with the fleet boats, but I enjoy WWII submarine warfare. I'll play a German u-boat simulation if it's done well enough. If SH5 doesn't do well enough to support future developments, I'll never see the series return to the Pacific.

Razark

Roger that

That's some strategic thinking

Grey_Raven75 · 08-21-09, 12:51 PM

There's something else to think about here. It'll certainly send a message to Ubi if no one buys when the game comes out, but I think it may be the wrong message. As far as the number crunchers are concerned, low sales on a games release probably equals: "well, no more games like that." IE there's no market.

Now, obviously that's not the message we'd want to send. The devs probably read these forums, that's who we think we're sending a message to. But it's not their decision when a game ships. I'm sure they don't want to ship a buggy game.

We should just be careful that we don't shoot ourselves in the foot by not buying when the game ships.

ETR3(SS) · 08-21-09, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

I personally have no doubt that they do. However, the problem doesn't lie with the devs. The problem lies with the bean counters. Somebody has on their sig here that "all devs need to make a good game is time." When a potentially good game gets shipped too early that will have a negative impact on the companies reputation. Look at EA for example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grey_Raven75

There's something else to think about here. It'll certainly send a message to Ubi if no one buys when the game comes out, but I think it may be the wrong message. As far as the number crunchers are concerned, low sales on a games release probably equals: "well, no more games like that." IE there's no market.

Now, obviously that's not the message we'd want to send. The devs probably read these forums, that's who we think we're sending a message to. But it's not their decision when a game ships. I'm sure they don't want to ship a buggy game.

We should just be careful that we don't shoot ourselves in the foot by not buying when the game ships.

InFlames666 · 08-21-09, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by razark

My first post was satire. Sorry if I was too confusing. My point is that if we don't support the series, the series will die. If the sales for SH5 are not strong, SH6 will never be produced. If sales for SH5 are not strong enough, patches will not be produced. The company will find other things for developers to do instead of supporting a game that nobody is buying.

Therefore, it is in our interests to purchase SH5, even if it is not as great as it could be. Personally, my interest lies in the Pacific with the fleet boats, but I enjoy WWII submarine warfare. I'll play a German u-boat simulation if it's done well enough. If SH5 doesn't do well enough to support future developments, I'll never see the series return to the Pacific.

Razark

thats why i'm going to buy it right when she hit the stores, i'm fine with a few bugs here and there, i'll just have to help get rid of them

razark · 08-21-09, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InFlames666

thats why i'm going to buy it right when she hit the stores, i'm fine with a few bugs here and there, i'll just have to help get rid of them

As long as there are no major problems, I don't have an issue with an occasional bug. It is in Ubisoft's interest to provide a well tested product.

Shearwater · 08-21-09, 03:40 PM

I won't pre-order the game right away, for two reasons.
First, I want to have some reviews in adance. Granted, SH3 has been as great as expected (or even better), and though I've never played SH4, it was also a great game on its release, despite all the flaws. I just pride myself on healthy skepticism

What I also want to know in advance, and it's been mentioned a couple of times: Hardware specs. The game looks like it'll use some version of the SH4 engine, but I'll just wait and see. Though it's true that Ubi Soft is the only company around that still makes subsim games, I won't buy a game just to shelve it until I buy a new computer, which could be years. To me the increase in hardware requirements during the six or seven years has been almost nauseating, and it's something devs really should give a bit more consideration.

On the major points though, I'd agree with TDK1044, so that's enough for now. It's just that there's no place for bitching like the internet

Rosencrantz · 08-21-09, 04:19 PM

With SH4 I did just what Neal recommended; bought the game right on release, and then put it in the self for a while. I have been myself whining about unfinished products some times, but on the other hand, who can expect to find a company which is capable to offer it's customers 99,5 % finished sub simlation on reasonable price? Sure, Navies and Armies have their combat simulators, but think the price they have paid for them... That's why I think every sub sim needs and will need especially two things to stay alive: the company (as builder) and modders (as people who'll get the job finished).

Greetings,
-RC-

Nexus7 · 08-31-09, 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by razark

My point is that if we don't support the series, the series will die. If the sales for SH5 are not strong, SH6 will never be produced.

This is not the only possible result IMO.
Should SH5 not sell well enought, this *could* result in Ubisoft revolutioning the series, maybe stepping forward to cold war era ? Who knows...

Quote:

Originally Posted by razark

If sales for SH5 are not strong enough, patches will not be produced.

This is the worst scenario to me. That has already happened... for example with Dangerous Waters!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by razark

Therefore, it is in our interests to purchase SH5, even if it is not as great as it could be. Personally, my interest lies in the Pacific with the fleet boats, but I enjoy WWII submarine warfare. I'll play a German u-boat simulation if it's done well enough. If SH5 doesn't do well enough to support future developments, I'll never see the series return to the Pacific.

Razark

The detailed likings of us, are most certainly to be seen as very fragmented... to make everyone happy there should be maybe 20 versions of SH5 ?

Btw, the theory where "if you don't support the producer doing an early buy the producer will go away" is true, but the power to change that is not in our hands. The enjoyability of the game will make it a success or a failure, not us "fanatics" do a pre-order. A game well done will publicize itself automatically (and the price won't lower that fast)
I did a pre order on Dangerous Waters in good part to substain the producer, and what did I get ? An unfinished game and the producer closing the door. Anyway, this is quite a different simulator, with a smaller size of potential buyers.

himlaviz · 09-02-09, 08:23 AM

I want this to be a worthy SH3 sequel.
I want ubi/devteam to make money on this.
I want to feel that ubi/devteam support the product, post launch.
I want to look forward to content addons and patches.
I am willing to pay for content addons, like more subs, ships and features.

If they plan to release a content/feature addon by the end of 2010 I think it would benefit the sub community as we might help them fix and add more features to the game while the have a team still working on the simulation.

For a great product I would be happy to pay $10-20 more if that's what it need to get 3-6 more months of development/testing. But I think a release with a planed addon probably works best, at least for the community to have a chance for giving feedback to the devteam (if they want it).

Sometimes I get the feeling some want games to be half as expensive and done in half the time and work on hardware half as good as the previous game and have double the content as the previous product.

Gaming is a hobby, hobbies are fun, I don't mind spending $$ on my hobby.
But thats me, and I am probably a bit insane and brainwashed by 12 years of MMORPG's

Looking forward to Silent Hunter V and playing SH3+GWX3 until then.

ETR3(SS) · 09-02-09, 10:58 AM

You sir are clearly brainwashed by MMO's. I was a MMO player myself until I realized I was paying $15 a month for crap. Which is probably why you are so willing to pay $70-$80 for a game. Quit playing MMO's, you will find life much more enjoyable, and you'll have more money to spend on important things...like beer.

himlaviz · 09-02-09, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

You sir are clearly brainwashed by MMO's. I was a MMO player myself until I realized I was paying $15 a month for crap. Which is probably why you are so willing to pay $70-$80 for a game. Quit playing MMO's, you will find life much more enjoyable, and you'll have more money to spend on important things...like beer.

I did spend more on beer, quit it for MMO's.
It's what you make out of it, $80 for a game you play for many hours sure has more value then a ****load of beer twice a weekend and you don't remember what you did anyway.

ETR3(SS) · 09-02-09, 12:45 PM

I apologize for coming off as so...stern. Since I gave up MMO' I've seen them for what they really are and can be rather vocal about them. But you are right about that beer part, that's why you bring your friends along to remind you of how silly you were while drunk!

But I still say $80 for a game is too much. Hell at times I think $60 is price gouging. $50 would be nice, especially when the value of the games depreciates so quickly.

himlaviz · 09-02-09, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

I apologize for coming off as so...stern. Since I gave up MMO' I've seen them for what they really are and can be rather vocal about them. But you are right about that beer part, that's why you bring your friends along to remind you of how silly you were while drunk!

But I still say $80 for a game is too much. Hell at times I think $60 is price gouging. $50 would be nice, especially when the value of the games depreciates so quickly.

No worries

Sometimes I do find the way to time consuming, that's for sure.
Well perhaps a bit much with $80 but if they released like new theaters, campaigns from time to time with small tweaks to the game engine I wouldn't mind put some $$ into it. Keep the game running for some time when this type of games takes a lot of time and resources to develop

08-21-09, 12:33 PM	#2
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	Excellent points, and well made! __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

08-21-09, 12:51 PM	#4
Grey_Raven75 Mate Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 60 Downloads: 30 Uploads: 0	There's something else to think about here. It'll certainly send a message to Ubi if no one buys when the game comes out, but I think it may be the wrong message. As far as the number crunchers are concerned, low sales on a games release probably equals: "well, no more games like that." IE there's no market. Now, obviously that's not the message we'd want to send. The devs probably read these forums, that's who we think we're sending a message to. But it's not their decision when a game ships. I'm sure they don't want to ship a buggy game. We should just be careful that we don't shoot ourselves in the foot by not buying when the game ships. __________________ "If you don't know history, you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree." --Edward Johnston

09-02-09, 10:58 AM	#12
ETR3(SS) Ocean Warrior Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Between test depth and periscope depth Posts: 3,021 Downloads: 175 Uploads: 16	You sir are clearly brainwashed by MMO's. I was a MMO player myself until I realized I was paying $15 a month for crap. Which is probably why you are so willing to pay $70-$80 for a game. Quit playing MMO's, you will find life much more enjoyable, and you'll have more money to spend on important things...like beer. __________________ USS Kentucky SSBN 737 (G) Comms Div 2003-2006 Qualified 19 November 03 Yes I was really on a submarine.

09-02-09, 12:45 PM	#14
ETR3(SS) Ocean Warrior Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Between test depth and periscope depth Posts: 3,021 Downloads: 175 Uploads: 16	I apologize for coming off as so...stern. Since I gave up MMO' I've seen them for what they really are and can be rather vocal about them. But you are right about that beer part, that's why you bring your friends along to remind you of how silly you were while drunk! But I still say $80 for a game is too much. Hell at times I think $60 is price gouging. $50 would be nice, especially when the value of the games depreciates so quickly. __________________ USS Kentucky SSBN 737 (G) Comms Div 2003-2006 Qualified 19 November 03 Yes I was really on a submarine.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-21-09, 03:40 PM	#8
Shearwater Captain Join Date: May 2009 Location: SUBSIM Radio Room (kinda obvious, isn't it) Posts: 542 Downloads: 45 Uploads: 0	I won't pre-order the game right away, for two reasons. First, I want to have some reviews in adance. Granted, SH3 has been as great as expected (or even better), and though I've never played SH4, it was also a great game on its release, despite all the flaws. I just pride myself on healthy skepticism What I also want to know in advance, and it's been mentioned a couple of times: Hardware specs. The game looks like it'll use some version of the SH4 engine, but I'll just wait and see. Though it's true that Ubi Soft is the only company around that still makes subsim games, I won't buy a game just to shelve it until I buy a new computer, which could be years. To me the increase in hardware requirements during the six or seven years has been almost nauseating, and it's something devs really should give a bit more consideration. On the major points though, I'd agree with TDK1044, so that's enough for now. It's just that there's no place for bitching like the internet

08-21-09, 04:19 PM	#9
Rosencrantz Grey Wolf Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Finland Posts: 758 Downloads: 78 Uploads: 0	With SH4 I did just what Neal recommended; bought the game right on release, and then put it in the self for a while. I have been myself whining about unfinished products some times, but on the other hand, who can expect to find a company which is capable to offer it's customers 99,5 % finished sub simlation on reasonable price? Sure, Navies and Armies have their combat simulators, but think the price they have paid for them... That's why I think every sub sim needs and will need especially two things to stay alive: the company (as builder) and modders (as people who'll get the job finished). Greetings, -RC-

09-02-09, 08:23 AM	#11
himlaviz Mate Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sweden Posts: 55 Downloads: 28 Uploads: 0	I want this to be a worthy SH3 sequel. I want ubi/devteam to make money on this. I want to feel that ubi/devteam support the product, post launch. I want to look forward to content addons and patches. I am willing to pay for content addons, like more subs, ships and features. If they plan to release a content/feature addon by the end of 2010 I think it would benefit the sub community as we might help them fix and add more features to the game while the have a team still working on the simulation. For a great product I would be happy to pay $10-20 more if that's what it need to get 3-6 more months of development/testing. But I think a release with a planed addon probably works best, at least for the community to have a chance for giving feedback to the devteam (if they want it). Sometimes I get the feeling some want games to be half as expensive and done in half the time and work on hardware half as good as the previous game and have double the content as the previous product. Gaming is a hobby, hobbies are fun, I don't mind spending $$ on my hobby. But thats me, and I am probably a bit insane and brainwashed by 12 years of MMORPG's Looking forward to Silent Hunter V and playing SH3+GWX3 until then.