Not even a game, let alone a sim

[Floyd]

IMHO it's a very good simulation, although many details are not obvious.
Torped a ship yesterday, but only hit near the propeller. Using externals
i could see the propeller wasn't turning any longer and the ship stopped.
After a few minutes the damage seemed to be repaired and the ship made a
few knots. But the shaft must have been out of balance, because
it was "wobbling" and not turning "round". Never seen that before.

[Duke_Wellington_1st]

Originally Posted by Aimbot

People who say **** like that have never owned a console. Most console games have their fair share of bugs. The difference is that, until the 360's (the current generation of the xbox, champ) downloadable content the bugs were there for life, unless of course the game sold well enough for a special edition that would cost another 30$.

Ok - scratch the "bugs" comment then, how many console games have you purchased that came out of the box unfinished to such a degree as SHIV ? We all know that it just doesnt happen. anyways this is probably linking up to a much greater discussion... Its just painful to see this rushed approach to games development - in order to release a shiny, good looking, but ultimately failed product.

[ijozic]

Originally Posted by Duke_Wellington_1st

Ok - scratch the "bugs" comment then, how many console games have you purchased that came out of the box unfinished to such a degree as SHIV ? We all know that it just doesnt happen. anyways this is probably linking up to a much greater discussion... Its just painful to see this rushed approach to games development - in order to release a shiny, good looking, but ultimately failed product.

How many console games do you know that are so complex as a game like Silent Hunter IV is?

[Aimbot]

Originally Posted by Duke_Wellington_1st

Ok - scratch the "bugs" comment then, how many console games have you purchased that came out of the box unfinished to such a degree as SHIV ? We all know that it just doesnt happen. anyways this is probably linking up to a much greater discussion... Its just painful to see this rushed approach to games development - in order to release a shiny, good looking, but ultimately failed product.

I don't buy console games that review poorly, because I know they can't be patched. My cousin is not so picky, he has a copy of True Crime: Streets of LA that is just as buggy as SHIV before the patches. Madden 06 for the PSP was so buggy EA had to recall it. And if you want a game that advertised a bunch of features it couldn't deliver the icon is an x-box game: Fable.

[Boris]

Gollum hates SH4, hates it he says... Ubi ruinsed it! Gollum, gollum

From Oz to Hamburg? What did you do wrong? Sleep with the admirals daughter?

[bruschi sauro]

yesterday i have re-installed the sim with the patch 1.20, and played some war patrol, I am not very happy,,,the grafics become far more superior, but the real content that I want is far from the standard of Sh 3.
Now I am waiting for the patch 1.30 UBI.. WHERE IS UBI?
GWX 1.30 USERS
U-65 IXB

[joea]

Originally Posted by gollum31548

Sorry Captains, just installed the 1.2 patch, started a new career and was ordered to photograph enemy carriers. In Manila. On 10 December 1941. I don't much care about eye candy, but anything calling itself a simualtion should, at least, simulate the conflct, should't it ?

I think I am gonna shelve this one until about patch 1.4 and hope it gets better

Well sorry but the stock campaign in SH3 was as unrealistic as it seems SH4 is. This is up to the modders to change. I think we forget that sims and games can be realistic in one area and not another. IMHO, a sim needs a balance in graphics, physics (including weapons and damage modelling), environment, and what your are talking about historical context. SH3 with GWX is currently at a stage with a good balance.

[nfitzsimmons]

Originally Posted by captainFlunky

Good point. But I think that given the state of PC gaming vis a vis console gaming we are at a transitional point as consoles 'catch up' to PC's as far as sophistication is concerned. Unfortunately, I think the writing is on the wall and there will be less and less complex simulation games coming out in the future because of the potential earnings from developing the 'Britney Spears' for consoles that cater to a younger demographic with more time and disposable income to dedicate to games. It's sad really and makes me long for the good old days of the late 80's, early 90's when Dynamix was putting out games that couldn't possibly be rivaled by the SNES or Genesis. Back then I think, PC gamers had deeper, richer games then their console brothers could ever hope for. (Not that I didn't waste many an hour in college playing Madden, PTO, or Aerobiz on Ye Olde SNES.)

Lets face it- games like SH4 are a dying breed, and not to sound overly fawning I think we should enjoy it while we have it, shortcomings and all. I too wish there was "more" to it, but it's not like there are oodles of sub sims out there as opposed to the seemingly thousands of mindless FPS.

I agree with your point here. Let's face it, it's a whole lot easier to develop for the console market because you have one hardware platform you have to work with. Unlike the PC market where you have a huge number of possible hardware/installed software/OS combinations.

To illustrate this point, I'm not seeing some of the 1.2 issues that a number of people have reported here, but I am seeing some others. Does my 7600GS behave differently that someone else's 7600GT? Or is it due to different CPU, or BIOS version, or OS patch level, or whatever?

The unfortunate point is that gaming companies are seeing a huge increase in households that have both a PC and a dedicated gaming console of some flavor, and they are going to gravitate to the market with the most profit.

[nfitzsimmons]

Originally Posted by Grothesj2

What is the old saying about going to war? 95% boredom and 5% sheer terror? 95% boredom doesnt make for a very good game though it would make for a more realistic sim I guess. And you got that right, how many players want to go out repeatedly and get nothing to shoot at? But hey, that would be realistic.

Hey, if we want true realism, let's eliminate time compression entirely.

[perisher]

Originally Posted by Duke_Wellington_1st

The game claims to be a Naval Sim, I bought it for that reason (having loved the series). This isnt the case.
It seems that as time progresses and graphics become far more superior, publishers are far happier delivering "eye candy" instead of the real content that developed the original fanbase. The recent patch only reinforces my opinion on this (giving us anti-aliasing instead of fixing the motherload of real problems...) I see many posts on here from young chaps appluading themselves and the game for sinking battleships in full res and how exciting and beuatiful it is.....without thinking that this was done on the 2nd patrol, with no chase given by the escort, with no real effort involved....not to speak of realism.

Im sure there are people plenty happy with this, there always will be. But I cannot help but feel that ALOT has been lost between this version of the game and SHIII.
I hate seeing decent game series on the PC get eroded by this "console gaming" mentality. yes, it sells, but so does Britney Spears and Paris Hilton :P

At the end of the day Ubisoft is a commercial company that has to make money to survive. It makes commercial sense to go for the bigger market, although, as the recent record numbers of visitors to these forums shows, we, the more serious gamers, are a significant minority. Subsim has a good relationship with Ubisoft and we should take care of that, after all how many companies out there are making subsims?

We should encourage Ubisoft to produce more of what we like but not expect them to do it at a significant cost to their larger customer base. As long as they continue to make some effort at realism and leave the games open to mods we should be thankful. No one will ever produce a game or sim that will please us all, we all have our own ideas about the realism / playability balance. For instance, Ubisoft have put a cap on the number of missions in a career, just like real life and yet it is often complained about here. The developer can never win them all, and neither can the moder, and the same goes for the game player.

Personally, to hell with graphics, give me real control of my boat.

[Tobus]

Originally Posted by Duke_Wellington_1st

I hate seeing decent game series on the PC get eroded by this "console gaming" mentality. yes, it sells, but so does Britney Spears and Paris Hilton :P

The strange thing is:
numerous reports claim that most gamers are in the ages of 25-45, are very critical in their choice of games, are more fervent in the mostly deeper PC-games than in the more visually and speedy oriented consoles and spend more money on games and entertainment because they have jobs. I certainly fall within this category.

In this regard it is at least odd that more and more dev's are making games for PC that seem to be more and more catered to the "console-type" players of ages 25 and below. Or even worse: port a console title to PC with horrible bugs (Splinter Cell DA for instance).

Why focus on the kids and consoles when the big bucks can be earned in more mature PC games? Is the developmentcost for such games that much higher than the 13-a-dozen console games?

BTW, this is no rant on consoles guys, to each his own. That's what makes the games-industry so great.

[btaft]

Why focus on the kids and consoles when the big bucks can be earned in more mature PC games? Is the developmentcost for such games that much higher than the 13-a-dozen console games?

It is all about dollars....check out this link, Console games outsell PC games 6:1 in dollars and 5:1 in units with the gap widening over time

http://www.theesa.com/facts/sales_genre_data.php

They focus on the kids for the "Daddy buy me this" effect. Whether Daddy is playing the game or not, he is typically the one buying it for junior. Eventually junior grows up and has his own money and the console game makers want to ensure that he continues to spend his money with them

Also we live in a society of instant gratification, where the quick "relatively easy" sinking is more attractive and holds the attention longer than the stalking the convoy for a few days to sneak in and hope to knock off a couple of merchants which would be more appealing to an older crowd.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the "true" simulation market be sent to the same hole that classic turn based strategy games have gone....only available on-line through download from specialty vendors (matrix games, battlefront, etc). Some of the hardcore racing sims have already gone this path where they are support mainly by community support. I would give it about 5-10 years

Having said that, I fall pretty deep into the 25-45 crowd and prefer a good true simulation (any type) that requires a steep learning curve than an easy quick fix. The good news is I will likely save a bunch of money since the number of available titles will dwindle/disappear but I will probably have to spend a lot more trying to keep a decent PC running with Windows XP in the year 2015

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by nfitzsimmons

Hey, if we want true realism, let's eliminate time compression entirely.

That's not quite true either. If we want true true realism, eliminate the time compression and then spend 24/7 in front of the computer staring at different screens until something actually happens.

[CCIP]

Here we go again, people confusing realism with reality. Very different things!