Does this mean there is no SH4?

[Wulfmann]

Originally Posted by Ula Jolly

CFS3 sucked so bad in comparison to CFS2, I'm not even gonna start. Seriously, it was... anal.

Not for people that can mod and tweak. No other CFS comes close. Of course one must trash nearly everything in the stock game and devote hundreds of hours to get it working right.

But, for those that do not want to do that CFS3 certainly sucked badly compared to IL-2 series. For a sim that just pops in and plays you are correct and particularly for multiplayer IL-2 is the only way.

CFS2 was a very fun sim in its time but quickly dated with severe limitations.

Oleg knew his IL-2 engine was inferior to CFS3 but his play was so much better. I am sure his new engine will be very impressive. It needs to be. The new Aviation History CFS3-MAW FMs are the closest thing to reality anyone one has done. But, they are not released yet so you can either believe it or wait and see.

Wulfmann

[ironkross]

Originally Posted by wetwarev7

I agree. If you ever get a chance, check out Egosoft's X3: The Return. This series is by far the best space game, period. I first learned of it when they had just come out witht the expansion pack for the first one, and I was able to order it and the expansion, with overseas shipping, for like $25(US), because there was absolutly no marketing for it here in the states.

I find that as a rule of thumb, the more marketing a game has, the less likely it will be a ground-breaking or epic experience, and almost ALL games made in the States by large companies are market driven. All the best, classic games I can think of were all made by people or companies who were, at the time, nobodies.

I see a trend in the industry to rush to the game platforms at the expense of PC games.
Sorry to get off topic but I played XBTF after picking it up in a bargain bin and trying it and becoming elated and spellbound by such an amazing game. I couldn't get the expansion. I later played X2 and loved it but I'm holding off on X3. I agree this is the best space game series there is. I was at first a little put off when I heard Egosoft had decided not to include cockpits in the spacecraft in X3. I even posted on the egosoft forum a comparison between X3/egosoft and SHIII/Ubisoft. I pointed out how Ubi refused to compromise their game in order to create shortcuts in the development process. I compared the lack of cockpits in X3 to the hypothetical situation of Ubi excluding the modeled interiors in SHIII. You could still play SHIII but the immersive factor would be lessened. I felt the decision not to model the cockpits was a concession to make the game more adaptable to Xbox.
I would like to know if you have played X3 yet? And what do you think about the state of the game now? Do you think they should have released a game that was unplayable right out of the box? I realize there's a patch now to correct most of the bugs but this type marketing strategy is terrible. I really don't feel I can get a realistic answer on the Egosoft forum. There are too many there who either have a Pollyannaish view point or post outright falsehoods in their overzealous attempts to support Egosoft. I have never seen anything like that on Subsim's forum. If I have a problem with a game here I usually recieve helpful responses and not someone telling me it's my fault or my computer's fault or my driver or vidcard etc.
Anything but Egosoft's fault. Sorry,
Sorry for the off topic. I'll shut up now.

[Trav_R]

To Cworth:

You've got a somewhat skewed perspective on these game companies. They *have* to make money, if they want to continue making good games. In the business world, you make a product, and hope that you can sell enough of it to cover your expenses at the very least. If you are very good, you can actually make a profit, which is better, because the profits can then be spent on making a better game the next time around. There's nothing inherently wrong with this system.

With software engineering in general, and game design in particular, the "creating a product" part is extremely complex and time consuming, requiring a team of very skilled professionals several months or years to complete a product. This means that creating a game is *extremely* expensive for a company, which means that they are going to have to pay extra attention to all business aspects if they are to cover costs and make a profit, thus ensuring their survival.

One of those business aspects that they have to carefully consider is how long to support a game and how much money to spend in supporting it. If the game sells well enough and it appears that it will continue to do so, the company can afford to support it more, thereby further increasing consumer happiness and sales. If, however, the product doesn't sell well enough, they have to make some tough decisions. In the case of SHIII, sales weren't enough to justify spending a whole lot of money supporting it long after its release.

The game is, in my opinion, hands down the best sub sim ever created and it may stay that way for several years. That doesn't automatically mean it's going to sell well, though. Most people who play a lot of video games are not interested in sub sims, or any sim even remotely hard-core. They want shooters, beatemups, maybe some arcade style flying games, things like that. SHIII is way too in depth for about 90% of gamers, and nothing Ubisoft does will change that. The idea of slinking around the Atlantic in a slow, fragile, weak craft, and only managing to "whip some ass" through a fair amount of skill and effort just doesn't cut it for your average gamer. They want explosions, heads getting blown off, pixellated boobies, and they want it all quick and easy. They want cheat codes, they want walkthroughs, they want spoilers.

Games like SHIII just aren't very marketable, and any time a company makes one, they are putting their life on the line, in a sense. They are well aware that they stand a fair chance of losing a ton of money, and, very possibly going bankrupt. Why would they do it? Because they love great games, and they love even more to make great games. A game like SHIII doesn't come into creation by a bunch of money-grubbing scumbags. The game is simply too good to be created by people that low. But the people who created it are normal people like you and me, and normal people don't work for free. This means that if the game doesn't sell well enough, and they continue to support it, they are essentially doing it for either very cheap, for free, or at a loss.

So, in the plain and true words of Peter Gibbons from Office Space, "Where's the motivation, Bob?"

[kiwi_2005]

Hey let's be glad we ended up with as good as sub simulator as SH3. After all, we could have ended up with a sub sim that was very very poor in quality. Good Hunting on the high seas, Erich Topp U-552

Yeah i totally agree.


Its OK comrades, we have Silent Hunter 3 we have professional modders, we have Wolves at war, we have the WPL we have beer! Ahh sorry. But i figured this there be no SH4, ages ago, just didn't want to say anthing just in case i got hunted down .

If Silent Hunter III had sold a few million copies like games such as Civiization thats now up to number IV, then there would be a Silent hunter 4. Unless some other developer buys the rights of Ubisoft, then we have SH4.

Until then see you on the seas.

[ReM]

There will definately be a SHIV someday.....the only question is when (and by whom).
Quality subsims have been few and far between......I thinks y'all should be glad that there have been two of those this year (SH IV and DW, which I still haven't played but heard of a lot)
Anyway: there will be another great subsim, and yes it will take a while.
Until then: be glad that the modders in this community keep churning out new wrinkles that keep SH III interesting!

[ENtek-IO]

I really dont care how you name it, but Fact is they delivered a unfinished product.! IF you check out the files in depht you will find the traces of unfinished features everywhere.
Imagine that, you buy the newest Porsche and they left out the Turbo loader, because they had to release it .!??
What kind of company ethics is this?
Its just not UBi who lost it, its the whole industry,screwing over customers via unfinished products.IF Auto companys would do that one time they would be out of the circus.
A real Exclusion.
Compare this to Companys like Codemasters, And their game OP flashpoint.
I would gladly pay 200 Bucks if the game had everything you would expect from their own announcements, and it is FInished , BUG free to 99%.

Whats this SDK bull****??? Where is it, i am waiting,.. Are the modders nowadays the new Standard enemy of the companys?? Stealing them sale opportunities?

Shortsighted to say the least , a real jester is one who doenst know the value of Loyal customers and has no clue how to nurture the tree on whichs very branches hes sitting.

Yet there is One real disgusting aspect ,more then everything else.
ITs the disrespect shown to the programmers and artists who get paid to less and are work slaves ,but who got a right that their art is dispalyed adequately, and not in a product which leaves the impression that respect to anyone who is relevant was left out over greed and or shortsighted winmax and growth philosophys.

FAct is in 50ty years from now on, alot of people will have a hard time to look in any mirror, because you can fool yourself only so much time before you must realize that you are one of the peoples who make the world a worse place to live in.

But how can i expect respect for the programmers and artists and customers, from people who dont even respect themselves?? Nm

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by ENtek-IO

Imagine that, you buy the newest Porsche and they left out the Turbo loader, because they had to release it .!??
What kind of company ethics is this?

If the Porsche is going for 35 bucks, I'll manage!

[ENtek-IO]

Its irellevant if its 60K for a car or 50ty for a game.
From my point of view its even worse if it is "just a 50ty bucks" case.
Because, whoever buys a porsche is surley not in any financialy pressured situation.
But of course, in that price range you dont screw your customer over, right?
But if its only 50ty bucks you only hit the small guys as a majority, which is ethically ok.
Revealing.
I think this is the result of arround 35 years of breeding spinless, wisedomless, executive personal into the wrong positions.

[TDK1044]

Guys,

From the commissioning company's point of view, it's simply a case of what is the shortest time it will take to develop and release a popular game that will produce a healthy profit for the company. The size of the DEV team and the number of man hours needed is a huge consideration in deciding whether to proceed with a game or not. It is a fact that SH3 was developed in about half the time that AOD was. Considering that fact, SH3 is a pretty good buy for between $35 and $40. Sure there are a few glitches, but most of the complaints in forums such as this are largely subjective opinions rather than game faults. That being said, there are a few issues that the DEVS would like to have had the time to address. But nobody can afford to work for nothing, and so SH3 is what it is.

[kiwi_2005]

Submarine games are just not popular enough to have yearly sequels like the popular games that do. I love playing subsims. But we are a very small majority compare to people that play the id games (quake, I,II III and now IV), Battlefield games, Civilizations, or SIMS everyone or every female plays that damn game its so popular and there be expansions/sequel and more expansions to come out for a long time.

I visit other gaming forums now and then and try to start up a conversation about SH3, and find alot of gamers have never heard of it!

Although SH3 has made few of my mates that would never go near a subsim try it out. But think about it. Your in a sub out in the middle of nowhere waiting for a ship to past by. To a non subsimmer that is boring as hell.

[BettingUrlife]

I'm pretty disgusted myself to hear this. If a car was built that had problems from when it was introduced, there would be a recall. Even though many games are released with bugs, flaws etc etc (however I'm not saying this game is buggy or has an overly great amount of flaws), it seems that these companies can just dump support for these games. I know there is a difference between a car and a computer game, but for me, the principle is the same. Regardless of whether a company needs to make a profit or not, it is just plain wrong. I know there are many excellent modders in the company who can help improve this game, and even though we are all grateful to them, it's not their responsibility to fix it or fix the things.

Sorry for this rant, a little angry at the moment, hopefully what I've said is clear. I really like this game, but to hear that there will be no more patches annoys me intensely.

[TDK1044]

I understand your posting, but the fact of the matter is that four patches were released for this game in the first three months of its release. DEV teams are sub contracted by companies like ubisoft, and there comes a point where the commissioning company won't pay for continued support for a game that is working for 99 percent of the people who purchased it. Bear in mind, that only about one percent of people who purchased SH3 will ever go to a forum such as this. It's easy to believe if you are a frequent visitor to such a forum, that a decent percentage of users of the game also attend such forums. This is not the case. What this all comes down to is that more development time was needed prior to release and ubisoft were not prepared to pay for it. It's that simple. Now they will look at what it cost them to develop and how much they made on the game. If the level of profit is lower than the projected figure then they won't develop SH4 at this time.

[wetwarev7]

Originally Posted by ironkross

I would like to know if you have played X3 yet? And what do you think about the state of the game now? Do you think they should have released a game that was unplayable right out of the box? I realize there's a patch now to correct most of the bugs but this type marketing strategy is terrible. I really don't feel I can get a realistic answer on the Egosoft forum. There are too many there who either have a Pollyannaish view point or post outright falsehoods in their overzealous attempts to support Egosoft. I have never seen anything like that on Subsim's forum. If I have a problem with a game here I usually recieve helpful responses and not someone telling me it's my fault or my computer's fault or my driver or vidcard etc.

Sorry for the off topic. I'll shut up now.

That's odd, aside from the usual troll or two, I've never had a problem with Egosoft's site. Of course, I haven't been there in a while, so there may be new people there - The regulars usually come back shortly after a release.

I haven't gotten my copy yet, still saving up so I can get it AND Civ4 (which I understand has bugs as well). I had heard a rumor that the cockpits wouldn't be included, but from what I hear, it would probably be modded in if it's not there allready.

I agree that the trend now(and has been for a long time) is to release a game before it's ready. It's a shame, and immoral, and unethical, and unprofessional, and should be a crime. I tried for a long time to get people united and send a message to developers that this was not acceptable. In the end, I just got tired of being angry about it(a bigger shame). Unfortuantley, I find myself just accepting the fact that I now spend my hard-earned money for half finished products. I must be getting old...

[wetwarev7]

A follow up to the previous post:


I was just at Egosoft's forum, and found out they are using Starforce!!!! I don't know if I wanna buy it now....

[ReM]

Originally Posted by wetwarev7

A follow up to the previous post:


I was just at Egosoft's forum, and found out they are using Starforce!!!! I don't know if I wanna buy it now....

Lol this Starforce.........it's everywhere!
Damn it