Things you like or don't like about SH4

[Tigrone]

Originally Posted by JScones

But I am curious - was there a QA process on any of this stuff?

I asked about the Lancaster and was told by a moderator on the official site that it was probably due to young developers, who were not familiar with the subject.

Another moderator mentioned in a post that the game was not put out for independent or outside beta testing of any significance. Also, there do not appear to be any special consultants, as were used in SH3. The time available was very short. Due to the number of English language errors, I'm not sure there were many native English speakers involved at all, even as proof editors. These mistakes do not affect game play, which is a lot of fun and very pretty, and they are not bugs. The irritating thing is that they were designed.

I teach history myself, so these kind of errors grate on me. It makes it hard to get into game, when you keep getting tripped up by such silly trivial errors that steal from the story. In a way, I think it discourteous and kind of insulting to those who served.

[JScones]

Originally Posted by 08x15

Another moderator mentioned in a post that the game was not put out for independent or outside beta testing of any significance. Also, there do not appear to be any special consultants, as were used in SH3. The time available was very short. Due to the number of English language errors, I'm not sure there were many native English speakers involved at all, even as proof editors. These mistakes do not affect game play, which is a lot of fun and very pretty, and they are not bugs. The irritating thing is that they were designed.

So what did the "Lockwood Inn" people do?

Originally Posted by JScones

• Freemantle is in England. Fremantle is in Australia. Why then can I start two war patrols from Freemantle?

Sigh. And the paper map has Fremantle spelt with two 'e's too.

Anyway, some positives (let's be fair ). I've been closely looking at the unit cfg files today. Looks like there is loads of potential there for date-based, country-based, or just random skin changes, all from within SH4. No need for "file shuffles", LOL!

The need to clone units to reflect equipment, skins or other minor differences now seems obsolete too. A great step forward from SH3.

The radio concept with date-based messages is also cool.

At some stage I will actually play the game. I'm still looking at the files for now.

[Drebbel]

Sigh. And the paper map has Fremantle spelt with two 'e's too.

But atleast Galverton disappeared from the map

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Drebbel

But atleast Galverton disappeared from the map

Finally...us Texans are shown respect enough to spell our cities correctly!

Speaking of other corrections....I think they've taken a cue from GWX and added the Moltenort Sub Memorial. Scroll over Kiel area and it's on the map there. If it's actually there, I don't know. My sub doesn't have the fuel to get over to the heart of Nazi Germany to check it out.

[U-Schultz]

Ahh...a whiners page!
WARNING: These whines are my own based on my personal tastes and experiences playing every darn subsim since the early 1980's. No need for flamers. Have to get it off my chest.
My system: 3.6GHZ Pentium, 1 GB RAM, Nvidia 6800GT Video card, SB Audigy 2 sound card.

Summation: SH4 (or SH 3 1/2 as I like to call it) is a huge disapointment to me compared to my current yardstick of SH3 with GWX. Yes, yes I remember SH3 out of the box but in light of the developers supposedly paying attention to what has been done to SH3 by the modders I can't believe how SH4 shipped.

Pros:
Hmmmm.....to be honest I can't think of any off the top. And I'm a SH series"fanboi".

Cons:
Bugs: Many, and most already covered or mentioned. Every game has bugs and quirks but some of these are so egregious I have to wonder. Did anyone playtest the damn thing?

Attention to detail. Divebombing Lancasters (with upsidedown American markings!) during the battle of Midway? A small item? Hmmm....if this is present what other historical oddities/absurdities are in the game?

Graphics: Granted my vid card is a bit dated but I am not sure what the rave about the graphics are about. I think they are terrible. I have the settings maxed out (framerates are good though) and everything looks poor. The water is just O.K. up close but everything else....geesh....where to start. And despite my good FR the mouse seems laggy.

Interface: A mess, pure and simple. Hate it.

Periscope/TDC: Ditto.

Interaction with Crew: Poor. Even SH3 out of the box gave me more of a feeling of "being there" than SH4. And the crew? Weird looking...

Text Box: Dislike its current location.

Sound: ....

You know, I was going to continue but I think I'll just stop for now. I appreciate the work done by the Dev Team but thinking of what SH4 could have been (or should have been) makes it worse. SH4 is a huge step backward, in my opinion, and was shipped half baked. Thank god for the Modding Community here. SH4 is (hopefully after a couple of more patches) in your court now. Bless you!

Again, just my opinion, for the "Things you like or don't like about SH4" thread.

[OneTinSoldier]

I fill in the Sound part for you with just COUPLE of examples...

Audible Crew Announcements are very quiet


Try clicking for 20 degress to port. The crew response is...

"Yes Sir, Rudder 20 degrees."

In SH3 that response would have been, "Yes Sir, Rudder 20 degrees to Port." Which is much better IMO.

When you click the ' key on your keyboard in SH4 you get a crew response of "Yes Sir, Rudder."

In SH3 the response is "Yes Sir, Rudder 0 degrees." Which is much better IMO.


IMO, they have taken some rather large steps backwards from SH3 regarding sounds and crew interaction. It's that simple. I'm still wondering why they thought it would be better to NOT have a clickable Watchman, CE, Sonar Man, ect. Same with the gauges in the 3D compartments! Other than perhaps the on/off and range switch for radar, which does not move or have any markings!

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by JScones

It's early days for me yet - I haven't really played the game itself - but what has disappointed me so far is the apparent lack of attention to detail.

For example:

• Freemantle is in England. Fremantle is in Australia. Why then can I start two war patrols from Freemantle?
• Why does the Australian Roster have a Lancaster in the Pacific carrying an upside down US roundel? Whilst 1.1 seems to have replaced the US model with the British model, I'm still perplexed what one is doing over there in the first place!
• Indeed, why are all Australian planes carrying US markings (similar problems with other nationalities too)?
• Why are Indian ships flying the current Indian Ensign (similar flag problems with other countries too)?
• Medals? Already done to death.

Minor problems yes, but distracting nonetheless.

But I am curious - was there a QA process on any of this stuff?

Hah! I can live with that kind of stuff, does not affect gameplay at all. Wait till you try the MP As the convoy commander... you have no way of knowing what's going on out there. I played two games as the CC with 3 sub players... on HARD and NORMAL. I could not use the map, did not have any way of knowing when/if my escorts had a contact... and the manual is useless, does not explain anything in detail. Learn by trial and error, I guess.

Neal

[THE_MASK]

Quote Neal Stevens

"Hah! I can live with that kind of stuff, does not affect gameplay at all. Wait till you try the MP As the convoy commander... you have no way of knowing what's going on out there. I played two games as the CC with 3 sub players... on HARD and NORMAL. I could not use the map, did not have any way of knowing when/if my escorts had a contact... and the manual is useless, does not explain anything in detail. Learn by trial and error, I guess. "

Well i would have thought that the escorts should at least signal via there signal lights if they had a contact . Maybe this could be patched up in the next patch .

[jbt308]

Not to beat a dead horse, but after reading many comments from various experienced subsimmers, I think we can all agree on this point. SH4 isn't necessarily a disappointment, but I think for a lot of us, it's quite different than we thought it would be. Some like it despite its early quirks, others don't for their own valid reasons.

I, for one, thought it was basically going to be like SH3 but in the Pacific and as Americans with some fixes/updates. What I got was something very much not like SH3 at all. I would say that we went from a sub commander simulator(SH3) to a submarine simulator(SH4), good or bad, I think that's what's happened. I enjoyed the immersion SH3 afforded and I'm not seeing that really in SH4. Graphics aside, I just can't get drawn into the game like I was with SH3, even the straight-out-of-the-box version, loved that game from start until I installed GWX.

I was disappointed because I thought the Devs were going to deliver something very much "play wise" similar to SH3, what I got was something I wasn't expecting. It's not bad, just not my particular taste. I agree with the previous statements about the interface and many of the other issues, they all lend, in a small way, to the sum total of the game. This is definitely a Grateful Dead sort of game, either you like it or you don't.

I closing I'll leave you with this. SH3 is to Red Baron as SH4 is to IL2. IL2 is a superior game in many ways to Red Baron, but for me, it lacked a soul, a real reason for me to keep coming back to play, I can see something similar in SH4.

Just my opinion, glad there are those who are enjoying it.

[Onkel Neal]

Quote Neal Stevens: "Hah! I can live with that kind of stuff, does not affect gameplay at all. Wait till you try the MP As the convoy commander... you have no way of knowing what's going on out there. I played two games as the CC with 3 sub players... on HARD and NORMAL. I could not use the map, did not have any way of knowing when/if my escorts had a contact... and the manual is useless, does not explain anything in detail. Learn by trial and error, I guess.

Sober: Well i would have thought that the escorts should at least signal via there signal lights if they had a contact . Maybe this could be patched up in the next patch .

Yes, possibly the signal lights means "hey, player, over here". The really weird thing is, the manual says nothing about this. I'm hoping Ubisoft will release some design docs or something. Help files... something.

[edjcox]

I am astounded Neal...

You and a few select's were not consulted as this thing developed at all?

Are you saying that the Developers had little knowledge of SHIII and the mods in order to build on that foundation?

I suspect that language barrier was used as insular shielding and that true comprehension of the state of the game's maturity with the GWX release was completely overlooked by the SHIV team...

ahaaaa take the money and run..... UBI SH4 teams favorite song ???

let's hope not....

The GWX mod team ought to offer UBI their organization and consulting resources to fix this mess for a fee...

I to had "great expectations" but alas it was but a work of fiction...

[Hylander_1314]

After playing the game for two days, I went and dipped into the new rig fund, and got a new ATI x1550 GDDR2 256mb vid-card, as the game was playable, but the the details were all on the lowest settings.

So after the second patrol out, I ran into a Japanese convoy and sinking 2 freighters, and damaging 2 others, and avoiding the escorts for 3 hours, I like what I've seen so far. The only thing to get used to is the key commands that are different than SHIII. No biggie.

The gameplay is quite interesting as you dodge the destroyers, and airpatrols. The dive times are a little different than the ones in SHIII, but it's nice to be able to sound general quarters, and not have to manually move everyone around, and then securing from the latter is easier too as again there's no manual effort, except for the guys who are put on damage control. I like the way that the crew is already furnished, without having to go through a list and add them myself.

I can understand the early war frustration with faulty fish, sank one, the first time out and damaged another with all torpedoes spent. This was with a Gar boat.

All in all, I'm very impressed with how well the game plays, and the quick effort to get the first patch out to get some of the quirks sorted out. The eye candy is very realistic too, and really makes it feel like you are on the ocean.

What ever is left to correct, I can live with. The fact that I was able to load the game, and get it fired up out of the box with no ctds, or lockups, was a big plus for me. Thanks Devs. And thank you for going back to the Pacific Theater this time around.

[CybrSlydr]

I'm afraid my thoughts will mirror most already posted (didn't read all 258 odd replies...), but this is what I posted on another forum about Silent Hunter IV.

Originally Posted by CybrSlydr

I love Silent Hunter III.

I had a blast with it from the moment I started playing it back when I got it on release (even preordered it).

Things only got better. All the mods, the dev support, GWX, JSoft Mod Manager, etc...

It's spoiled me.

Now, what I'm about to say is with 0 knowledge of American subs.

Silent Hunter IV has a distinct... unpolished feel to it. I'm sure most of you will agree - even the devs I bet.

Looking in the manual, you see references to having your Watch Officer give a solution for a torpedo shot. Not available in this game. Among other references that don't apply to this game.

When you look at the US Subs in the manual, very, VERY little information is given. The information given is practically usesless. Class, Tonnage, Length, Surface Speed, Submerged Speed, Range, Torpedo Tubes and number of Torpedos.

Nowhere does it say rated depth. Nowhere does it say how many reloads for each of the tubes (find out only once you get in game). Nowhere does it give any sort of history of the sub and it's conception.

When you compare the numbers between all the different subs (P, Tambor, Gato, etc.) practically all the numbers are identical - save for a rough doubling of the range on some of the later models. No reason for it given - just poof! Surprise! Instead of 6000nm, you can go 11000nm. The different "models" aren't even given a different name, just a different year in parenthesis.

Were US subs REALLY this generic and... static through the war years?

One feature of Silent Hunter III I really liked was the different officers are how you went about doing things. Want a watch crew on deck? Click the Watch Officer and select the "Crew on deck". Want to see the torpedo situation? Click the Torpedo Officer. Etc. You would then hear the officer acknowledge your order and repeat it to the crew. "Aye aye, captain. Watch crew on deck!"

This has been replaced by generic headings that have some boggling options beneath them. Also startling is the lack of some options - such as a "Range at this speed" option. Critical when computing how fast to go en route. Also gone is the depth under keel option. With the removal of the Watch Officer, you no longer have the option to spot out nearest contact. Etc.

Also gone is the one-click Damage Control crew. Replaced is a manual dragging of crew into each slot. You also no longer have rack space to place crew. Each position on the Crew Management screen is a duty position. Gone are the specific stations such as Radio Man and Radar man, replaced with the generic "Conning Tower" - and no description of what's there is given so you can tell who to put where. Granted, it's pretty easy to tell who goes in a Torpedo Room and by process of elimination, you should figure it out. But still... Also gone are medics - because there's nowhere to put anyone to rest them up or heal them. Someone injured? Hope it's not too bad...

Everyone is in a position, so the only crew that are really available to do anything are those with Zzz by their names, indicating their watch is sleeping. Which can royally screw up rotations with one watch not getting enough sleep. However, I do like that they have watch rotations. REALLY makes keeping things straight while cruising simpler. Just don't forget to secure from battle stations. You'll end up in port with a ghost ship.

The crew is startlingly silent as well. Gone are the, "We're taking damage!" letting you know, "Oh crap!..." and to go check the sub status. Most of the time, the only hint is that your sub has inexplicably imploded - and you know this because you get the "End Mission' screen with "Your Sub: Destroyed".

I'll also throw in the absurdly generic medals, the fact that if you lose your sub and are crushed at the bottom of the ocean... The next screen will be either your sub has returned to port, barely and they mechanics can't figure out how you did it - but the Admiral will grudgingly give you another commission OR you damaged Navy property and the Navy is putting you in the brig for the duration of the war pending Court Martial charges. BUT I'M DEAD!!!

Also amazingly frustrating is trying to use the AA guns facing either side - your view suddenly clips through the side of the turrent and obscures the entire screen - meaning the only places you can actually see to shoot are... directly to the rear and a sliver of 5deg. to the front. The rest is totally blind.

For most of my games, the meter for diesel fuel has been broken - gone to Japan and back without the meter ever moving off the full mark. Battery durations are woefully inadequate - ahead 1/3 (Slow) will give you battery for maybe... 7 hours? On the subsim forums, proof has been given that in War Time, the batteries, at 2kts submerged, were rated for 55 (!!!) hours! In game at 2kts submerged, you can barely manage 12hrs.

Crush depths are also completely off. Crush depth at 185 ft?? The game was released with only meters being the available measurement, but in the 1.01 (1.1?) patch, Imperial was allowed. However... In game, the crush depths (I think) are still given in feet, but calculated with meters. I.E. - I take the sub to 185 feet, the game thinks it's 185 meters - poof!

From those who do the manual torpedo launches (damn math...), even they say one of the intergal tools (stadimeter) is broken. Dunno much about it as I've not looked too much since I don't use it.

When it comes to torpedos, no information other than the name is given. Mk. 14. That's it. No powerplant info, no range info, no speed info, no guidance info... Nothing. Zip. Grr...

Most sounds are direct carry overs from Silent Hunter III - not a big deal for me since I played that game with German voices and English text. So, I'm not familiar with the American dialog. Torpedo sounds are the same, sub sounds are the same, plane sounds are the same... You more often than not get a bug of a looping explosion sound if you hit a merchant. You see the ship sitting there and keep hearing these explosions - and nothing going on ON ship. Grrrr...

To give some positives, the graphics look nice - but still no AA. Doesn't even work if you force it through ATI Tray Tools or the Catalyst Control Center. Dunno about you nVidia guys.

Ships look pretty darn good too - excellent detail. Same with the seabed having rocks and plant life. Ports are populated (sunk a Kongo Class BB on my 2nd mission raiding a harbor) with the new patch. You can go as high as 8192x Time Compression (instead of the 2048 cap in Silent Hunter III, which via a mod was expanded to 4096). Resolutions (in my game) go up to my native of 1920x1200 instead of a cap at 1024x768 as in Silent Hunter III. Performance is very good on my machine. The water looks amazing.

This is all I can remember at the moment. I'm sure I'll add more as things go along.

Despite all of what I posted above, I'm still sort-of enjoying Silent Hunter IV. I don't know if it's me, but the Pacific just doesn't have the draw of the Atlantic with all the history and... sex appeal that the U-boats have. Yet. Dunno if that'll change.

I'm very disappointed that it appears the Devs were either not given enough time (where have we heard this before?...) or dragged tail a little. My guess is the former, not the latter. Once again, a game was released before it was ready, credit to the devs for having a patch ready to go to fix some bugs (and add the S-Class sub to the game) as quickly as they did. Word on Subsim is that they are still hard at work supporting the release like they did with Silent Hunter III. I'm happy to know that. They did a fine job with Silent Hunter III.

Once again it appears that the publisher has thrown the sim out with hopes that the community can fix it to their liking after the Devs are pulled off the job. Argh...

This sim has great potential (I hate using that phrase...). With what the community did with Silent Hunter III, I have high hopes for Silent Hunter IV.

I just wish that we didn't have to rely and hope for the Community's time and ability to do things right.

Please, if anyone bothers to read that whole spiel and finds errors that positively effect the game, lemme know!!!

[labo]

We have lost the torpedos salvo's now you have to do it manually

[Condor96]

I don't like that little book sitting in front of my hydrophone bearing indicator