A positive perspective

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Excellent post, TDK. However I think it should be emphasised that the devs were working with a truly cruddy deadline. All thanks to their most esteemed publishers. Just imagine what they could do given more time.

[Zengaze]

I can only echo the sentiments expressed so far in this thread, especially point out that we simmers are probably the most demanding types around we not only need a good game we need a perfect game, (which may i state i believe we are entitled to). But i do believe we got fall in behind devs who make games for our genre, "lend a hand to the wheel" as it is said.

[Jace11]

Its still a rubbish effort though...

Your comments are just excuses, the product that people have paid for is SUB-STANDARD not a SUB-SIM.

People have been lied to, cheated and let-down, they are disappointed and are rightly aggreived, get over it...

[oritpro]

Originally Posted by Jace11

Its still a rubbish effort though...

Your comments are just excuses, the product that people have paid for is SUB-STANDARD not a SUB-SIM.

People have been lied to, cheated and let-down, they are disappointed and are rightly aggreived, get over it...

Whoa, tell us how you really feel!

Although I agree with you I do not blame the devs or the beta testers for a half-baked piece of software. It is management that determines what gets fixed and what doesn't as well as if it gets fixed at all.

I know this from experience as a software tester although in a different industry--computer networking.

Publishers care only about the bottom line, not whether or not the software works as advertised.

[CCIP]

Frankly, all that I want at the end of the game is a game worth $50. And I spent $400 directly because of it so far, so that tells you whether I thought it was or not. :p

I think the "Sub-standard" comment is totally unfair Jace. What is the standard? Where is the standard? I think SHIV makes many errors and has its share of bugs, don't get me wrong - but it is THE standard in Subsims and will be until we get another title. There's no other standard to go by.

I think also the comparisons to modded SHIII are unfair. Again, modders have to be praised for the massive efforts involved in getting the game where it ended up, but there is just no way the devs could compete with literally dozens of people's manpower being invested over a period of many months, with noone but themselves to answer to when the question of "when is it released?" and "what should we include?" and "what audience should we cater to?" came up.
And the modders would have nothing to work with if there was no game to start with. Don't underestimate just how much even the most advanced mods gain from the original game.


There is no way right now subsims can survive without commercial development. And as such, I think SHIV is a noble effort; it's not perfect but its flaws are well worth putting up with temporarily. There has been a great effort in patching the game and I have faith in support for it continuing.

I'm also taken aback by all the negativity, definitely with TDK here. Constructive criticism is one thing, but please, is your $50 really worth so much that you're going to demand the impossible for it? Think about it, when it goes through the commercial chain (rotten though it may be) - money gained from your copy might realistically cover only the cost of one or two man-hours of the game's development time. Even if it costs less to develop the game in Romania, it still costs a lot. Personally, as much as it's uncomfortable to make this argument - I think many people are just a little too conscious of their consumer rights. Sure, don't buy the game. Don't support "substandard" products. Don't add to Ubi's profit. Don't reimburse the development cost. Demand perfection for your $50. And watch development prospects sink to Davy Jones' locker, and the future of our hobby along with it.

[Marko]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Frankly, all that I want at the end of the game is a game worth $50. And I spent $400 directly because of it so far, so that tells you whether I thought it was or not. :p

I think the "Sub-standard" comment is totally unfair Jace. What is the standard? Where is the standard? I think SHIV makes many errors and has its share of bugs, don't get me wrong - but it is THE standard in Subsims and will be until we get another title. There's no other standard to go by.

I think also the comparisons to modded SHIII are unfair. Again, modders have to be praised for the massive efforts involved in getting the game where it ended up, but there is just no way the devs could compete with literally dozens of people's manpower being invested over a period of many months, with noone but themselves to answer to when the question of "when is it released?" and "what should we include?" and "what audience should we cater to?" came up.
And the modders would have nothing to work with if there was no game to start with. Don't underestimate just how much even the most advanced mods gain from the original game.


There is no way right now subsims can survive without commercial development. And as such, I think SHIV is a noble effort; it's not perfect but its flaws are well worth putting up with temporarily. There has been a great effort in patching the game and I have faith in support for it continuing.

I'm also taken aback by all the negativity, definitely with TDK here. Constructive criticism is one thing, but please, is your $50 really worth so much that you're going to demand the impossible for it? Think about it, when it goes through the commercial chain (rotten though it may be) - money gained from your copy might realistically cover only the cost of one or two man-hours of the game's development time. Even if it costs less to develop the game in Romania, it still costs a lot. Personally, as much as it's uncomfortable to make this argument - I think many people are just a little too conscious of their consumer rights. Sure, don't buy the game. Don't support "substandard" products. Don't add to Ubi's profit. Don't reimburse the development cost. Demand perfection for your $50. And watch development prospects sink to Davy Jones' locker, and the future of our hobby along with it.

I agree but sh4 miss some basics as it went out.
Keys that you hit and u crash, stadimeter that was not working, ugly manual, radar that is unfinished and if it is finished is horrible unreadeable ranges impossible to see what is going on i must relay almost and what a guy say me and after he stop to speaks, a recognition manual that is annoyng to use, shooting at multiple target without auto aiming it is a pain, an interface that speak to u with some programmers mambo-jumbo lanaguage ....
Captain : "Chief whats the status of our engine?"
Chief : "They are 0.098"
Captain : "WTF is that... and our Fuel?"
Chief : "99/100"
Captain : "Surface the boat and prepare my raft.... i am out from this cage of mads"
c'mon lets speak about cubic meters (or whatis is in imperial mesure) let's speak about ampere for the batteries let's speak about percetage of co2 in the air,
let's speak about immersion in a sub game i don't like see windows progress bars in a wwII simulation, sound is horrible (ok modders can do the job thank you for your existance), manning a twin turrent gun and your visual is blocked on port side and starboard side, missing buttons, ok what's left.....well i can sit on the bridge and look at the nice graphics of the water flowing from my periscope while my crew is manning all other thing and i choose the approuch course

we are missing something that we achive with sh3 that's the problem!

[Faamecanic]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Frankly, all that I want at the end of the game is a game worth $50. And I spent $400 directly because of it so far, so that tells you whether I thought it was or not. :p

I think the "Sub-standard" comment is totally unfair Jace. What is the standard? Where is the standard? I think SHIV makes many errors and has its share of bugs, don't get me wrong - but it is THE standard in Subsims and will be until we get another title. There's no other standard to go by.

I think also the comparisons to modded SHIII are unfair. Again, modders have to be praised for the massive efforts involved in getting the game where it ended up, but there is just no way the devs could compete with literally dozens of people's manpower being invested over a period of many months, with noone but themselves to answer to when the question of "when is it released?" and "what should we include?" and "what audience should we cater to?" came up.
And the modders would have nothing to work with if there was no game to start with. Don't underestimate just how much even the most advanced mods gain from the original game.


There is no way right now subsims can survive without commercial development. And as such, I think SHIV is a noble effort; it's not perfect but its flaws are well worth putting up with temporarily. There has been a great effort in patching the game and I have faith in support for it continuing.

I'm also taken aback by all the negativity, definitely with TDK here. Constructive criticism is one thing, but please, is your $50 really worth so much that you're going to demand the impossible for it? Think about it, when it goes through the commercial chain (rotten though it may be) - money gained from your copy might realistically cover only the cost of one or two man-hours of the game's development time. Even if it costs less to develop the game in Romania, it still costs a lot. Personally, as much as it's uncomfortable to make this argument - I think many people are just a little too conscious of their consumer rights. Sure, don't buy the game. Don't support "substandard" products. Don't add to Ubi's profit. Don't reimburse the development cost. Demand perfection for your $50. And watch development prospects sink to Davy Jones' locker, and the future of our hobby along with it.

CCIP... Im not tryng to flame you here.. but here are my thoughts.

Its one thing if the bugs are minor, or details that are wrong. But when the bugs affect the fundimentals of game play, there is a real problem. Especially when these things should have been caught in beta being as they happen to everyone and are not just hardware related.

1) The AAA guns vision being blocked by the conning tower sides.

2) A key causing a CTD

3) The craptastic jaggies that appear on any resolution other than 1024X768 (hello.. we are not in the mid 1990's anymore with 17" CRT monitors). This REALLY ruins the immersion factor for me.

4) TDC and Mk14 and 23 torps not being able to use Fast speed settings without missing target 99% of the time.

5) Missing sounds (rudder...rudder anyone)

6) SD radar (or is it SJ) picking up air targets

Most of these arent game stoppers...but combined all together really ruin a great sim. I know the devs are working on these, and hopefully UBI wont pull the plug on the patches before the devs finish (ala SH3 that if still played with 1.4b isnt finished).

My point is that bugs that are hardware specific (dont happen to all people), or are so buried in the code that they only happen given specific situations, are to be expected. But bugs that stand out like a sore thumb to ALL who play..should have been fixed prior to release.

Again not blaming the devs as they were trying to cram as much fun stuff in as they could before release. And I imagine the choice was to either include all these fun items and not comb through and fix bugs, or fix bugs and leave out important features. I just dont like the idea that UBI may pull the plug and leave the devs with no choice but to leave the game partially finished. Especially if they wont release a SDK so our BRILLIANT modders can fix it for them.