What do you feel about SH5 now?

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by Frumpkis

Simple, it's a reality check. I'm waiting to see if the game is worth buying yet or not, and it may be that some things that bother me aren't as bad as I think they are. If you look at what I've posted so far about SH5, one of my main concerns was the quality of the AI. I've received mixed opinions about that, so I'm still on the fence. I haven't been posting that many actual complaints about the game (do you have me confused with someone else?) and I haven't been one of those screaming about the DRM, because I think I can live with it, if the game is worth it. Posting my concerns about the game is simply a way to take the pulse of fellow gamers as a reality check, and see if I'm getting a good sense of the current state of the game.

its totally worth it imo.

[Nisgeis]

Originally Posted by Frumpkis

Simple, it's a reality check. I'm waiting to see if the game is worth buying yet or not, and it may be that some things that bother me aren't as bad as I think they are.

Reading about the game and playing the game are very different. I read about the game whilst I waited for it to arrive and when I finally did play it, it was nothing like I had come to expect, based on the comments I had read.

Originally Posted by Frumpkis

If you look at what I've posted so far about SH5, one of my main concerns was the quality of the AI. I've received mixed opinions about that, so I'm still on the fence. I haven't been posting that many actual complaints about the game (do you have me confused with someone else?)

No, I haven't got you confused with someone else. I'm just disagreeing with your point, because I think that actually contacting a company and telling them what you think is better than doing nothing at all. Direct complaints will do more good than indirect complaints as well, so it is not just a case of not buying the game and that's it.

Originally Posted by Frumpkis

and I haven't been one of those screaming about the DRM, because I think I can live with it, if the game is worth it. Posting my concerns about the game is simply a way to take the pulse of fellow gamers as a reality check, and see if I'm getting a good sense of the current state of the game.

Reality is in the eye of the beholder. Some say that the AI was fine in the original version, where it got harder over time, others say that it was broken, regardless of the date, others say that the patch has improved the AI and others say that it has not. How are you going to seperate all of that out and get the true picture? Throw in the fact that some who will be complaining won't have played the game and will have misunderstood the situation and will be giving false information on top of all the different opinions (see the campaign goals for an example of that) and that will make it harder to get a true sense of the state of the game.

[7thSeal]

Originally Posted by janh

Console or not

Which means best entertainment for the cost, for the developer and a bit more for the receiver... Don't think for one second that money makers haven't already considered your 'opinion'.

They place their bets on the easiest path to follow with least amount of cost.... and yours?

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Magnum

Wrong, you are not their customer nor a SH5 player so you're not entitled to have a valid opinion about something you actually don't own. Period.

Me as a valid customer, I have the right to smash their faces, scream my anger all over the world and never buy another product with their logo on it. But if this gets mixed with those feelings and hate who don't own the game, my voice will never be heard and taken seriously.

See you've got that totally wrong. I own copies of SH3 and SH4. My purchase of Ubi products and production of value enhancing content for them makes me a legitimate poster. (produced any mods or tutorials Magnum? What have YOU added to the value of Ubi products? No, huh? Nothing, huh?) Therefore I am a vested customer, already demonstrating my ability and willingness to purchase Ubi products and enhance their value to Ubi when they meet my requirements. SH5 falls short. Very short. Jingle! Jingle!

See, they hear that message. They know who I am. They know about my contributions to the SH4 world. They will either respond to my jingle and make money or not and publish console shoot-em-ups with whatever Sword of Damocles DRM they think is appropriate for people willing to pay to be abused.

After they make the wrong decision we will get the submarine simulation we need. After they make the right decision we will get the submarine simulation we need. Either way, withholding the money wins.

On the other hand, paying the money is rewarding their behavior so far and is in no way an encouragement to change. And the day they pull the plug on their 3 lousy servers, you have nothing but a drink coaster and wasted hard drive space. For that reason it doesn't even matter how good the game is.

[Frumpkis]

Originally Posted by Nisgeis

Reading about the game and playing the game are very different. I read about the game whilst I waited for it to arrive and when I finally did play it, it was nothing like I had come to expect, based on the comments I had read.

I would normally agree with you, except that here we're dealing with code from SH3 and SH4 that has been substantially re-purposed for the current version. I can recognize some of the things that have carried over, like a certain hydrophone operator who would never make it aboard a real WWII naval vessel, because he won't follow orders and report a contact that can be clearly heard through the 'phones.

No, I haven't got you confused with someone else. I'm just disagreeing with your point, because I think that actually contacting a company and telling them what you think is better than doing nothing at all. Direct complaints will do more good than indirect complaints as well, so it is not just a case of not buying the game and that's it.

On what are you basing the assertion that "actually contacting a company and telling them what you think is better than doing nothing at all"? Sorry, but that just hasn't been my experience in 20+ years of PC gaming, including working very closely as an inside beta tester for a few games. I think I can recognize companies that respond a certain way, or who don't respond.... and I think Ubi is one of the non-responders.

To put that a different way.... if Ubi ever decides to drop the requirement for a constant Internet connection, do you think that will be due to massed email complaints? Or will it be because the bean counters have decided the game is far enough past the initial retail window, and into bargain bin/Steam discount status, and they need to milk a little more income out of the game? You can fire off all the emails you want, but it doesn't affect a basic bottom-line decision making process like that. At that point, they're only interested in people who haven't bought the game, not the opinions of those who already bought it!

Reality is in the eye of the beholder. Some say that the AI was fine in the original version, where it got harder over time, others say that it was broken, regardless of the date, others say that the patch has improved the AI and others say that it has not. How are you going to seperate all of that out and get the true picture? Throw in the fact that some who will be complaining won't have played the game and will have misunderstood the situation and will be giving false information on top of all the different opinions (see the campaign goals for an example of that) and that will make it harder to get a true sense of the state of the game.

Well, again, so much of this is familiar from SH3 and SH4 that it's not that hard to form a picture of the game status. For example, convoys that go totally chaotic after an attack, or aircraft flying in the middle of the night very early in the war with no radar or navaids... yep, very familiar.

[longam]

With DW UI and patch 1.2 it better then ever. Loving it.

[Sharkbait24]

Unfortunately, it's bugged, it lags, and it's just not as good as SH4. I will continue playing Wolves of the Pacific.

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by Sharkbait24

Unfortunately, it's bugged, it lags, and it's just not as good as SH4. I will continue playing Wolves of the Pacific.

fortunately, i've seen few bugs and no lag, and its just better than sh4. sh4 is still bug ridden and laggy. i will continue playing battle of the atlantic.

[U-Bones]

I don't love it. I did buy it. Every other option rang true to me.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Nisgeis

I disagree that someone who hasn't bought a product has a right to complain about its poor performance.

I agree to a point, which is why I rarely post in these threads. I lodged my complaint about DRM when it happened, and that is a legitimate complaint that I only repeat when forced to. As to how the game plays, that doesn't keep me from buying it, and I will when I can, bugs or not. And then you won't hear me complaining much, because I'll be too busy trying to help fix what I don't like.

People who know me from the General Topics forum know that I usually don't get take sides too much, but mostly like to point out when someone's argument is flawed. And that's why I entered this one - because the car arguments are bad reasoning. I agree that it's annoying when people complain about things they don't like but don't actually play them, yet nobody complains when I cheer for this or that mod, even though I don't own the game.

I'm not one complaining about the patch or anything else. That said, you can argue that people shouldn't post here if they don't own it, but the idea that they should be banned from posting here is a bad one. If any one person makes too big a habit of spamming here or anywhere else, Neal and his staff will warn them, and take further measures if need be. Until then, argue all you like but don't call for exclusivism in a forum. It's bad for the liver.

Oh, and I agree about contacting UBI. Something is always better than nothing, and posting here is nothing as far as they are concerned. The devs sometimes read and even post here, but the people who run things? I'm betting not.

[Zachstar]

Complete and utter fiasco and no will not be buying it until it reaches 10USD or so.

Ubisoft continues to fail and fail and fail.

[SloppyMk27]

I don't know how else to say it but, they can't fix the game with bandaids. It is so much more than the game itself that is broken but, the confidence and respect from SH3 and SH4 players of all kinds who looked forward to SH5 and received the slap in the face from Ubisoft by giving us a half a game and DRM Service to make for damn sure we (the legitimate buyers) paid for it and also to chase off the very few game crackers out there. Bad move by Ubisoft . I would have gladly waited another year for SH5 to come out so they could make the game the way it should be. I'm not blaming the programers. I suspect the game was rushed out to the stores by corporate staff when the programers were trying to make this game much better than it is. That's just my theroy. I keep seeing more and more retail products that appear to have started with a neat idea and then rushed to whatever was deemed close enough to being done and then be put into production with no thought of the consumers in mind.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong. ~ That phrase was originated by Dennis Miller, but it's one I agree with.

SloppyMk27

[robbo180265]

Originally Posted by Frumpkis

To put that a different way.... if Ubi ever decides to drop the requirement for a constant Internet connection, do you think that will be due to massed email complaints? Or will it be because the bean counters have decided the game is far enough past the initial retail window, and into bargain bin/Steam discount status, and they need to milk a little more income out of the game? You can fire off all the emails you want, but it doesn't affect a basic bottom-line decision making process like that. At that point, they're only interested in people who haven't bought the game, not the opinions of those who already bought it!

If there are no massed email complaints then I doubt UBI will drop the DRM. I still can't understand the logic of not writing to the suits (I.E. the people in charge) and letting them know how you feel.

IMO you have it right in the part I've bolded , however I do believe that they would only be interested if you tell them why you are not buying their game.

Why not cover all bases and write to them if you feel as strongly as you appear to? I've done it , it took me only a few minutes and the cost of a stamp - how hard is that?

[jxyn]

After playing SH4 and now this game I've found this version too unstable to play and I'm very disappointed with it.

Pretty much a fiasco from my POV.

I've posted a query thread about CTDs, I'm wondering if anyone might have some knowledge about what may be bringing these about. If I can't fix this I might then remove the game.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...07#post1391907

Thanks in advance.

[JScones]

Originally Posted by robbo180265

Here - I'll make it easier for you guys:

UBISOFT
1st Floor, Chertsey Gate East,
London Street,
Chertsey, Surrey, KT16 8AP


Drop them a line and tell them how you feel. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain

Why waste time writing to London? You might as well just whine here. No, much better to go straight to HQ:

Ubisoft Entertainment SA
Attn: Mr Yves Guillemot, CEO
28, rue Armand Carrel
93108 Montreuil-sous-Bois Cedex
France

Or call or fax:
P: +33 (1) 48 18 50 00 (switchboard)
P: +33 (1) 48 18 55 00
F: +33 (1) 48 57 07 41
F: +33 (1) 48 18 52 82

I won't post direct employee email addresses - I'm not sure if the addresses are publicly available.

Of course, you have about as much chance of getting through direct to the CEO as you have winning the lottery without buying a ticket, but you may just feel better...