The whole game = epic fail?

[jazman]

Originally Posted by Sone7

Is that really important?
The whole bunker thing is just an eye-candy, "cool feature", used instead of simple menus. I don't mind what's in there, and what's not.
A few years ago noone would even bother as it's totally not important from the gameplay point of view. And let it stay that way

I don't know... All that time spent coding eye-candy, and fundamental problems remain always unresolved. Sub on rails... Can't abandon ship...

[FIREWALL]

Only a handfull of us have the game now. How can anyone play the game enough and post here at the same time is beyond me.

The learning curve to me isn't that easy.

It didn't come with a printed manual or a keycard.

So figuring things out is time consuming.

I for one am not going to waste my time posting screenshots to hear how crappy they are.

[Schunken]

I maybe be not so harsh because I be familar with such glitches....

Just look the microsoft flight simulator series:

Base game FSX for 50 EUR with really easy to flight aircrafts (for the masses) and very basic AI traffic and airports....

And than it beginns:

PDMG 747-400 and MD-11 100 EUR
3rd party-Developers Airport 20-40 EUR.
Weather tools (like aktive sky) 50 EUR
and so on and so on....
I think I spend 1.000-1.500 bucks in my FS career....

On the other hand there are for sure tonns of freeware, some of them really proffesional done....

We are really be in a niche with our Sub-Sims...

Andreas

[JScones]

EPIC FAIL? Geez, I thought I was critical! If the game had critical crashes, that might warrant such a dramatic tag. But at the moment all I am seeing is a game that inherits the same design flaws as its predecessors plus adds a few more design flaws to reflect the new content. Extremely disappointing, yes, but not what I'd call an EPIC FAIL.

Granted I haven't read every post made today, but from what I have read, a lot of the "bugs" are:

1. posted by people still finding their way around the game and have yet to learn how to properly do the things that they claim are bugs (the poor manual doesn't help either).

2. seemingly innoculous - minor inconveniences that will surely be corrected by modders.

I'm sure there's some howlers there (sub-on-rails falls under the inherent design flaw category) and some howlers waiting to be discovered, but I haven't yet found anything that repeatedly breaks the game. Happy to be proven wrong though.

[ddrgn]

Originally Posted by JScones

EPIC FAIL? Geez, I thought I was critical! If the game had critical crashes, that might warrant such a dramatic tag. But at the moment all I am seeing is a game that inherits the same design flaws as its predecessors plus adds a few more design flaws to reflect the new content. Extremely disappointing, yes, but not what I'd call an EPIC FAIL.

Granted I haven't read every post made today, but from what I have read, a lot of the "bugs" are:

1. posted by people still finding their way around the game and have yet to learn how to properly do the things that they claim are bugs (the poor manual doesn't help either).

2. seemingly innoculous - minor inconveniences that will surely be corrected by modders.

I'm sure there's some howlers there (sub-on-rails falls under the inherent design flaw category) and some howlers waiting to be discovered, but I haven't yet found anything that repeatedly breaks the game. Happy to be proven wrong though.

Hehe GME works fine ;]

[SubV]

After reading some reviews and bug reports from users who already bought the game, I've got an impression that SH5 is a failure in many ways.

I think that most of us expected SH5 to be a modern version of SH3, with updated graphics, better interface and no major bugs.

Damn you, Ubisoft [Romania]. You never learned anything from your mistakes.

[karamazovnew]

Originally Posted by SubV

I think that most of us expected SH5 to be a modern version of SH3, with updated graphics, better interface and no major bugs.

Damn you, Ubisoft [Romania]. You never learned anything from your mistakes.

No major bugs yet. Compared with the Save-game fiasco of SH3 and the legendary A key of SH4, that's a big plus.
From what I see, SH5 really IS a modern version of SH3. It has the same flaws . What did you expect? SH5=SH3+GWX+OLC+othermods? The only minuses (apart from 43 and type 7 only) so far are the values for ships in the recognition manual (easy to mod in) and the depth under keel.

The modding possibilities and improved graphics AND free-roam capability totally outweigh the POS thing.

What we SHOULD do, instead of bashing the game, is spam the devs for badly needed EASY features for the patches.

[urfisch]

you are right. we not should bash the game...but set up some intense discussion about the actual state and how this might be changed instantly!!! nothing else was intended by me with this provoking thread title...

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by karamazovnew

and the legendary A key of SH4,

That was my "quit to desktop" hotkey. It was a FEATURE, not a bug!

[makman94]

if the engine of the game works ok then all other things is a matter of time to be 'fixed'
BUT the main question is this : is this a simulation engine? is anything modeled in game's engine ? physics...AI behaviour (random....? ''clever''...?)....eh...xm...manual targeting (with no contacts on map), properly...working sensors ....and what about weather ? is now working ?
if all these are not modelled at all or correct in game's engine...don't ever expect to see it as a sub simulation ( this doesn't mean that any of the previous versions was ever a sub simulation)