I wasn't going to jump in and say this, being a newbie and all...

[Immacolata]

Originally Posted by DaMaGe007

Posts complaining about the game are at least on topic and have a place here even if some people dont like it, due to thier percieved *hurting the sales* viewpoint which is a bit arroagnt imo.

My argument is merely that Im going to puke if I see another whinge about things that has been whinged over in 100s of threads. What is the point?

I also enjoy knowing that the devs read these forums. And Id hate to know they've stopped because they feel everyone is hostile towards them.

[DaMaGe007]

Originally Posted by OneTinSoldier

Sorry, but I disgree with that. I think a lot of people read through forums in order to form an opinion on whether or not they should purchase a piece of software. I think you get quite a bit more informed from reading forums than from even reading reviews.

I think you could say I'm a case in point. I was very close to deciding to not buy SHIV because it has a 3D Rendered World that is 'upscaled from 1024x768' and not the true resolutions that are advertised in the game(selectable in the graphics options), and no Anti-Aliasing. Then the Dev's made a post on here announcing they were aware of the issue and that they hope to fix it. Even though it was hard for me to believe they would pull such a stunt to begin with, the admission/acknowledgement made me feel a whole lot better about the matter and I bought the game.

Regards

I agree with you and there are certinly a number of people that do as you say, but if the thread views are anything to go by...

the most popular threads have 25000 views and some of that is repeat viewing which cuts the numbers down furthur, they sell 200000 300000 coppies of the game. A small percentage of the sales.

Think more people come here after buying the product, trying to resolve bugs hence alot of new users around release, and not that many new users a month before.
We are both correct from a certain point of view.

Edit: I think the devs diseminate things from the negative comments and they dont feel that upset by people criticizing the game, alot of the Negativity is posted by users *matter of factly* but it gets interpreted as emotional ranting.
Those threads have mostly been merged into thier relevant areas, where the *fanboy* Cmon guys ! threads do not.
These threads push useful threads off the front page. I would like to see some consistancy for both *sides*

[Chiller1064]

Originally Posted by yankee-V

Agreed, great post from Chiller. A level of insider information that provides some real perspective.

One question or comment for Chiller, have you ever known a game producer to roll their patches into later releases? That is ship them in the next round of the finished product. It seems to me that a large part of the audience for a given game is not the "hard core", or a least not yet, and may miss the patches/updates altogether.

Anyway, a bit off topic, but just curious.

Yes, that does happen but only after th initial print run has finished. As an example, a game I produced had an initial print run of 30,000 units for PC (which these days is a very nice initial) with version 1.0. When all 30,000 were sold by retail or sent back as returns (nothing wrong with the CDs, just returned to retail for various reasons and then sent back to us) and the retailer needed more were would remaster with the latest "patched" version- so we would create a whole new GM CD/DVD to be sent to the replicators.

Oh, and those returns would sit in the warehouse since the packaging was normally crushed or messed up until we initiated a jewel case program where the game would be sold in jewel case at $10 retail. Needless to say, if those units are sitting in your warehouse you're not making a penny on them.

[Chiller1064]

Originally Posted by OneTinSoldier

Sorry, but I disgree with that. I think a lot of people read through forums in order to form an opinion on whether or not they should purchase a piece of software. I think you get quite a bit more informed from reading forums than from even reading reviews.

A lot of consumers do search out community sites and on-line resources (like Gamefaqs.com or Gamerankings.com) before plunking down their hard-earned money. People make decisions based more off what other gamers (like you guys) are saying about the game. Potential consumers trust the reviews/opinions of fellow consumers more than, say, IGN or PC Gamer magazine (who are part of the industry).

So when people flame/rant on a forum like this there is some damage done to sales. People will see all the "this game sucks" rants and decide to hold off buying the game (maybe not buying at all or waiting for the price to drop).

[davejb]

I'd settle for
1) Fix the obvious bugs caused by meeting deadlines - press 'A' to CTD - come on, that's pathetic.
2) Write a manual that does more than wax lyrical about measuring the mast height - this one covers manual targetting okay, and skips lightly over everything else. It isn't a noobs manual (I'm ex SH1,2 and 3 btw) ... bordering on the completely useless in current form I'd say.
3) Blame the rest on the open architecture - I've just spent a day getting the program to run, despite my PC meeting the specs and all drivers being updated. Having to reload DirectX because my existing 9.0c omitted an odd file shows how well sorted Windows is - it's unfair to blame the devs for the sheer magnitude of the hardware/software options out there.

This'll be a damn good game about v1.3-1.4, I just wish I' had the patience to wait for then

[ComradeP]

Well ComradeP,

I think it'd be interesting to see what beta testers such as ACSoft have to say about your post if they read it. I think you should do a search for posts with his username and read a few of them. He would not say what he thought of SHIV prior to it's release due to being under an NDA. But after it was released it seemed to me he was being honest with his opinion concerning the 'state of SHIV as released' and it wasn't good. I'll leave you to figure out why that might be.

From the way you phrase it, it sounds like there was not enough communication between the testers and the dev team. It's possible, of course, but the dev team is communicating with Neal and I doubt that's only to fix PR leaks.

I might be wrong and I hope any beta testers will post their opinion, but this sounds to me like either a classic case of bad testing, not enough communication between the dev team and the testers or both.

I'm not blaming anyone in person, I'm just noting that I've seen similar scenario's during my own time as a beta tester, where some testers really didn't take their job seriously. I've also been in a few "ComradeP and some other guys vs the world" scenario's where the rest of the testers didn't take the time to check out serious bugs that were reported by other testers and which were also not fixed by patches. Needless to say, whenever that happened 9/10 threads on the forums after release can be described with the word "moaning".

So, regardless of the cause of the possible mistakes during testing, I still think Ubisoft Romania should have a chat or two with their testers and analyse what went right/wrong.

[John Channing]

And he wasn't the only Beta tester that posts on these forums.

Everybody has a different approach as to how they react in these situations.

There is a reason that Beta testers sign an NDA (many actually).

JCC

[John Channing]

Oh... and Chiller1064.

Welcome to the biggest (and I like to think best) Submarine Simulation Website in the world.

People like you, the Real Deal, are a welcome addition to our ranks and I hope you continue with us for a long time.

JCC

[John Channing]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

Yeah, with gamers there's some kind of retard psychology where people get their expectations absurdly high and then try to outdo each other in ranting and bashing. It's nuts. I'm glad to hear your perspective. Computer games are seriously complex creations, and historically accurate simulations are the most complex of all. With WOW you can give an orc an eyepatch or 8 toes and no one would notice, but if a Group 2 S-class sub has an after torpedo room, it's a problem.

The sad thing is, if you sat 95% of the people down with a dev team to go over a sim, they would be respectful and understanding. On a web forum, way too many freak over everything with the !!!! and the OMG SOMETHING'S WRONG!!! caps.

TELL IT, BROTHER!

It's just a game.

Wait... what?

JCC

[Chiller1064]

Originally Posted by John Channing

Oh... and Chiller1064.

Welcome to the biggest (and I like to think best) Submarine Simulation Website in the world.

People like you, the Real Deal, are a welcome addition to our ranks and I hope you continue with us for a long time.

JCC

Thanks! Seems overall like a great group of folks.

Sorry if it all came across as a rant, but last night I was having dinner with a buddy of mine who works for THQ and we started talking about SH4 and some of the comments I've read. We both started to talk about all the beatings and trashing we took over various games- so it kind of hit a nerve.

Some of the issues posted (like the "A" key CTD) would be something I hope I would have caught- but we all don't know for sure why SH4 was released in its current 1.0 state. My best guess is it went out the door due to retailer pressure and not because Ubi Romania thought it was ready to go.

The best thing is the guys at Ubi Romania are communicating with people here, looking at what's occurring and working to get things straightened out in a timely manner. Like I said, they do care about the game and want it to succeed so just give them some time and be respectful.

[Rosencrantz]

Hello Chiller!


As a consumer I'm pretty sure that:
1. Most of us doesn't mean to be harsh to Devs. They have done the very best they could.
2. Personally I don't like Ubis strategy to release games with full of bugs which pop up just after an hour of playing. That's not very polite and cause complainments.
3. People shouldn't accept products which are obviously released as "unfinished".


-RC-

[Hazelwood]

[QUOTE=Chiller1064
PC game development is VERY complex.
So it is impossible to find every bug and fix it before GM- no matter how hard we try or how much we want it to be perfect.

Gamers want their games and they want it now! They post on publisher, developer and fan site message boards constantly pressing for a game to get done NOW! Gamers call retailers and pester them on when the game is going to be at the store (almost to the minute). [/QUOTE]

Hi Chiller,

I agree. I would also add gamers want their games and sims for next to nothing. Even then it's not good enough and some of us (not I) devote countless hours to hacking and trying to get around the protection schemes so as to save the cost of a bottle of cheap Scotch. It's my view this is what killed the air combat sim market, which I sorely miss. Just try finding an authentic air combat sim these days. I lost all my pals in this area years ago when the air combat sims disappeared.

I have given all the business I can to the guys providing Falcon "Allied Force" these days but as they do not protect their CD in any way I know they are going to vanish. It saddens me how folks take advantage of them. Get it while you can. We ought to be more responsible in regard to serious simming or we may lose it altogether. After that it's "kiddie games" and "shoot-em-ups".

Sims are a remarkable entertainment and educational value. I am just old enough to remember a few WWII incidents and SH makes a real effort to recreate the atmosphere of those days. The patched SH4 is just fine. I even got the RADAR working although it is a flawed process I am happy to accept in view of the sim's outstanding virtues.

We have to point out flaws and, in fact, the developers invite this, but - as you say - let's be constructive about it. I used to be a developer too and appreciate the challenges involved with putting together a robust major application. If you want it perfect the first time, be prepared to pay $250 - not pocket-change - is my advice

regards,
Cpt. J. Hazelwood

[Chiller1064]

Originally Posted by Rosencrantz

Hello Chiller!


As a consumer I'm pretty sure that:
1. Most of us doesn't mean to be harsh to Devs. They have done the very best they could.
2. Personally I don't like Ubis strategy to release games with full of bugs which pop up just after an hour of playing. That's not very polite and cause complainments.
3. People shouldn't accept products which are obviously released as "unfinished".


-RC-

RC,

Ubi and other software companies do not purposely plan to release buggy software- that is just plain incorrect.

Like I've said, between development, retailers wanting concrete street dates, scheduling and coordinating production of CD/DVD and print materials, gamer demands/expectations and the impossibility of testing PC games to run on every combo of CPU, RAM, Video Card, Sound Card, Controller, etc.. this is a really difficult business.

Everyone works hard to make the best product possible and no one goes into this saying "let's slap together some crappy code and release it for $49 SRP". People's livelyhoods rest on the success or failure of each project. If it is junk and fails to sell then everyone at the dev studio is out of a job- so we all work very hard to get these games through this frustrating process with as few issues as possible and hope for a contract for a follow-on project.

It's not an excuse, just the way it is- and I do wish it was a better situation for all involved. Besides, you can always avoid buying "unfinished" software by not purchasing software at all- all software is imperfect and prone to bugs/issues on release (see Windows ME, XP and now Vista).

Even tabletop boardgames have "bugs" that require developers/publishers to release "errata sheets" to fix the misprints/mistakes. In some cases, they even replace misprinted game pieces/counters, cards and maps.

Just be reasonable and understand why these things happen and will be resolved ASAP by the publisher/developer. If that is too much to ask, then don't set yourself up for frustration by purchasing software.

[WFGood]

I'll say. "Amen to that." There is absolutely no way that every conceivable combination of components can be tested. I liken it to warship construction. Ships are built, delivered, taken on a shakedown, and then go right back into availability to repair all the things they did not expect when all the systems were integrated. (Simplistic analogy, but it is true.) This game has some fantastic features, and the bugs will get ironed out. We just need a little patience, as hard as that is.

[Rykaird]

If Ubi does their software development the way I've seen in other industries, they catalog a long list of bugs that they then classify into categories - in my company, that's Severity 1, Severity 2, and so on, where Sev 1 means a required capability doesn't run at all or crashes the system.

Product doesn't ship till 100% of Sev 1s are gone, with a cap on the total number of Sev 2s. Unlimited Sev 3s and lower can go on initial release.

Of course, these are the bugs known to the developer. Once the code is released there is a wave of CFDs (customer found defects) that flood in - people using key combinations the developers don't, or running different systems than were those used in test, etc.

So unless Ubi shipped the product with known CTD bugs, then they are pretty much in range on initial quality for a complex piece of software. All the bugs that don't cause crashes will get worked out over time, and rush patches to fix customer found crash inducing bugs will be issued. They may be on the hairy outer edge of the quality envelope here, but the initial quality of SHIV isn't some kind of sin. (That being said, I'm back to the Atlantic for a month or so while the next set of patches comes in.)

However, quality and feature completeness are two different animals. FSAA is an example of a missing feature, not a quality problem, as is the deprecation of crew and equipment interaction. This is where my gripe comes in, and here I'm not going to defend Ubi in the least. I have a reasonable expectation that SHIV will build on SHIII - that I should get more than what I had in SHIII. The useless (but heavily advertised) SHIV 3D control room is not a quality problem - its a development choice. That this choice was made due to financial or time pressure is not my problem - I paid full price for the game. I didn't get some kind of a discount to get fewer features. Hopefully this serious omission will be addressed in subsequent releases.

As for the histrionics of a minority of posters, yes, that's always true and is particularly rampant in the game community. But pointing out bugs, flaws, missing features, etc. is not in and of itself being overly critical or dramatic, but merely reflecting personal customer satisfaction.