Silent Hunter 4 Patch 1.1

[jeff lackey]

Well, there's a good reason most magazines review the out-of-the-box versions: that's what people are getting when they buy the product. Also, at least one editor told me a few years ago that he didn't want to encourage publishers to push things out the door unfinished, knowing they could still get a better review with a patch (I've had publisher PR folks send me a patch and tell me to not review the version in the box, but only the patched version - they then got very POed when I told them I was reviewing what my neighbor would get if he bought the game at Best Buy.)

I try to throw in a comment about a patch being available if it's out when the review is written, but the score and review still has to reflect the version shipped for review/retail shelves. Which is why it is really not good business to push a product out the door a week earlier (or even a couple of weeks, or even 4 weeks) if you could have significant bug fixes, etc. if you wait. Certainly not for a single week.

Immaculata - nothing to do with "high horses". The version they sent for review is the version we review. How long do you wait? Do I wait for a couple of weeks when I get a copy for review, hoping there might be a patch? Do I tell the editor to wait for two more weeks when a patch comes out so I can run that through the paces? There will be another patch after this one - do you wait for it? This patch isn't even out yet.

If the publsiher ships copies for review, and if they ship these to the shelves for people to purchase, that's what gets reviewed. It's up to the publishers to decide what they want to push out the door.

[stabiz]

Originally Posted by elite_hunter_sh3

yea i did that for real it aint spam its called supporting the devs so they actually have the money to keep updating it, if the game doesnt sell and they dont make money wuts the point of patching it and wasting more time money and resources on it????

You dont have a widescreen I gather? Anyway, I would be very surprised if the doubters were convinced by your post.

I dont like whats going on in here. If anyone is less than impressed by the graphics, people jump on the person calling him a child, whiner, not having perspective, gameplay is more important, etc, but if someone says something positive about a screeny, the same peeps agree and drools along.

Also, if someone writes something like "SH4 is awesome!", the mods call it "a great post".

My SH4 is in the mail, but the fanboyism is getting out of hand in here.

[nattydread]

I hope miles means nautical miles...there is a difference and it aids in time, distance, speed calcualtions considering we use knots for speed, not mph.

[donut]

Or is he just ASSUMED?

[rascal101]

Does any one actaully have an ETA for the patch.

I can heartily reccommend STALKER for those who want to try something different while they wait for the SH4 patch. I'm not employed by the makers of Stalker, just very pleasantly surprised by a very interesting new game.

Patiently awaiting the release of the SH Patch, hopefully some one will have worked out how to wipe the vaseline off my glasses, the new SH4 blurr is so wierd!

Originally Posted by donut

Or is he just ASSUMED?

[gmohr]

Originally Posted by unruhly

AThis is why the console has taken over gaming! You've for the most part got one chance at getting it right when the game is released. Period!

So true. So totally true. The day they get the ability to hotfix console apps is the day their quality tanks also... and that day is basically here.

[CCIP]

Okay, all the changes I consider the devs to have owed us anyway and nothing to gawk over, but the added S-class variant I consider a nice makeup gift! :p

Great work! I'm sure if this is released in a couple of days rather than weeks, it's a sign that 1) it was not the devs fault for the problems in release, but the publication schedule's; 2) it is a sign of good things to come as far as support.

[GT182]

Patch1.1 = 2 weeks. LOL Just a standing joke at the IL2 Forums. It could come sooner or later depending on how much the sim is badmouthed. And yes, they watch all forums concerning SH4 to see how the public feels about it, just as they did with SHIII.

As for the comments on "Joe Lunchbox (or Sally Housecoat) buys this game, tries to play it and gets turned off from sub sims forever because of the unfinished feel. Kind of a bummer."

If you feel as Immacolata says... "To be honest. Do you care about the Lunchboxes? or the Housecoats? No? I thought so. Nor do I. Thats just putting up an argument for arguments sake isnt it?"

Remember this... you were at one time in the same shoes as 'Joe Lunchbox (or Sally Housecoat). There was a first time you too played on a computer, and was greener then than the grass it's self. Have the same consideration for those players, as those before you had for you and gave you the help you needed. Now you can pay it forward and help those that haven't a clue. It makes me sick to read comments like that. Not everyone is forunate enough to know Sub Sim is here with help to give.

[Iron Budokan]

Originally Posted by jeff lackey

Well, there's a good reason most magazines review the out-of-the-box versions: that's what people are getting when they buy the product.

Egg-sactly! You just gotta love the argument I've heard all day: "Don't review the stock version, review the game with the load of patches that fix the orginal bugs and functionality and therefore make it a more enjoyable gaming experience. Anything less is not fair to the game itself!"

Kee-effing-rist, give us a break with that nonsense. Does Consumer Reports wait for the "fix" before they report the P.O.S. vacuum cleaner that rips up your carpet? I suppose we're supposed to overlook the functionality of a toaster that ignites into a fire bomb. It's all good just wait for the "patch" and ignore those third degree burns, look how well it toasts your bagel now? It is to laugh. It's this kind of sheep-like acceptance of shoddy goods and services that makes manufacturers continue to turn out over-priced garbage.

SH3 was buggy out of the box. From all reports SH4 is buggy out of the box. That's the reality. That's what should be reviewed, not the "sweetened" fixes, but the original game as released.

[Iron Budokan]

Originally Posted by GT182

Patch1.1 = 2 weeks. LOL Just a standing joke at the IL2 Forums. It could come sooner or later depending on how much the sim is badmouthed. And yes, they watch all forums concerning SH4 to see how the public feels about it, just as they did with SHIII.

As for the comments on "Joe Lunchbox (or Sally Housecoat) buys this game, tries to play it and gets turned off from sub sims forever because of the unfinished feel. Kind of a bummer."

If you feel as Immacolata says... "To be honest. Do you care about the Lunchboxes? or the Housecoats? No? I thought so. Nor do I. Thats just putting up an argument for arguments sake isnt it?"

Remember this... you were at one time in the same shoes as 'Joe Lunchbox (or Sally Housecoat). There was a first time you too played on a computer, and was greener then than the grass it's self. Have the same consideration for those players, as those before you had for you and gave you the help you needed. Now you can pay it forward and help those that haven't a clue. It makes me sick to read comments like that. Not everyone is forunate enough to know Sub Sim is here with help to give.

I was shocked to see that someone didn't give a rat's *ss about new players, but I guess it takes all kinds.

I was a new player, once. Like I said in an earlier post I didn't even know a commuunity existed when I got AOD! And, yes, I was a "Lunchbox" when I first bought Silent Service II. I suppose it's for the better I didn't know of a community back then, either, just to have someone say, "I don't care about YOU, new player."

[NefariousKoel]

I have to agree with the resolution issue. It needs to be addressed.

My native res on my LCD is 1280x1024 and it looks very bad. I changed it to 1024x768 to see if there was a difference and there wasn't. My monitor stretched the 3d like it does normally from a lower resolution.

The DirectX resolution fix for SH3 did much better than the current setup they're using. I hope they take note.

[John Channing]

Originally Posted by jeff lackey

Well, there's a good reason most magazines review the out-of-the-box versions: that's what people are getting when they buy the product. Also, at least one editor told me a few years ago that he didn't want to encourage publishers to push things out the door unfinished, knowing they could still get a better review with a patch (I've had publisher PR folks send me a patch and tell me to not review the version in the box, but only the patched version - they then got very POed when I told them I was reviewing what my neighbor would get if he bought the game at Best Buy.)

I try to throw in a comment about a patch being available if it's out when the review is written, but the score and review still has to reflect the version shipped for review/retail shelves. Which is why it is really not good business to push a product out the door a week earlier (or even a couple of weeks, or even 4 weeks) if you could have significant bug fixes, etc. if you wait. Certainly not for a single week.

Immaculata - nothing to do with "high horses". The version they sent for review is the version we review. How long do you wait? Do I wait for a couple of weeks when I get a copy for review, hoping there might be a patch? Do I tell the editor to wait for two more weeks when a patch comes out so I can run that through the paces? There will be another patch after this one - do you wait for it? This patch isn't even out yet.

If the publsiher ships copies for review, and if they ship these to the shelves for people to purchase, that's what gets reviewed. It's up to the publishers to decide what they want to push out the door.

Not for nuthin' Jeff, but it strikes me that there is a certain amount of irony at play here.

Most sub-simmers, at least the bleeding-edge, early adaptors, are also internet savy and experienced in the release-then-patch process and so will be able to avail themselves of any patches. Failing that I seem to recall that on SH3 there was some kind of auto-update feature.

Now without doubt your review will mention that the game was rushed out the door before it was ready, and, I guess, rightfully so.

However... with the first patch imminent, and the knowledge that it will fix a lot of the issues that are causing concern, isn't there an elemnet of rushing your review out the door?

Almost certainly the second pressing will be 1.1 or higher and that is the one that the late adaptors and casual gamers will be buying, so your review, based on a product that we know isn't the one they will be able to buy, might be seen as misleading and unfair?

I just askin'.

JCC

[difool2]

Originally Posted by jeff lackey

What is really sad and shortsighted: people reviewing this for the major magazines (and some outlets, like Gamespot) will be required to review the "out of the box" version. So, for example, my review for Games for Windows (previously known as Computer Gaming World) will have to be of the 1.0 version, with all of the issues that come with that version. If they were able to patch this thing within a week, they would have been SO much better off holding off for a week and releasing the updated version. The reviews/review scores would surely be a lot better. Ugh.

My experience with such magazines (PC Gamer included) is that they will often overrate
the games they review. YMMV.

[Shigawire]

Hooray to Romanian UBIsoft!

They knew the Gold release was thoroughly flawed and didn't rest on their laurels as so many others do. Praiseworthy indeed.

[NightCrawler-SimHQ]

Originally Posted by difool2

My experience with such magazines (PC Gamer included) is that they will often overrate the games they review. YMMV.

I know Ubisoft is shaking in their pants right now! :rotfl: How are we going to make everyone happy NOW!