A less than exuberant review from bit-tech.net - 2/10 ...

[Nemesis43]

Originally Posted by shmall

again wrong from my point of view, as I only have a amd6400, windows 7 and ati4870...so not top line and yet mine runs very smooth?

The engine seems to prefer ATI. I, being an Nvidia user, actually had to disable SLI to get smooth performance; with SLI it was more like smoothness interrupted by a great many stutters. I'm guessing the review was done on a machine equipped with Nvidia card(s).
On that note, has anyone had positive results from using SLI vs. not using it in SH5?

Silent Hunter 5 does such a good job of torpedoing itself you're far better off buying Silent Hunter 4 or a copy of Das Boot and reliving the glory days instead."

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. Thank gawd for sane people who tell it like it is. None of that "oh dear, we better be nice or we'll lose the only subsim maker in existence..." for that reviewer. Just the bottom line, plane and simple.

Repeat after me people: "SH5 is a load of bolox."

Now, doesn't that feel better ? Good to get it out of yer system huh ?

[Faamecanic]

Originally Posted by Bish0p

Getting really tired of hearing "yea but that's been fixed by mods"
That has no bearing on the vanilla install of the game.
There are tons of people who do not and will not use mods ever.

You can't release a crap game then say "oh but it's better with mods"

Think about it.
Don't you realize how bad that sounds?
I'm sorry if that offends you, that i feel your outlook is faulty, but it is..

Saying things like that is like putting a big red sticker on ubisofts door, that says "we don't care that you give us garbage, we will fix it for you."

I'm sorry but they got paid to make this game.
We did not.
We need to emphasize that this can not become the standard.
Because we all know it's getting worse.
And if you keep saying things like that, it will never get better.

I will not give my hard earned money to someone for something they sat on their butt being lazy for, then released, fully knowing how bad it was.

P.S. Regardless the reviewer is a child and his entire review is invalid due to his immaturity.
Sounds like he's 12..
He says "traced all the way back to 1996"
Like as if he was going back in a time machine to 1940..lol..
What a child.
But my point still stands..

This review was as full of FAIL as Ubisoft and this release of SH5.

The Seamen part just demonstrates unprofessionalism.

The pointing out of "too many ladders" "problems going up and down them" "Type VII only doing 7 kts" and several other errors show the reviewer really didnt spend time with the sim.

If he has trouble going up and down the ladders....then he should stick with Mario Kart or some other side-scrolling console game.

His comments on how slow the sim is "no matter what hardware you throw at it" is bollocks. You can see my rig specs below...its no screamer anymore and runs the sim just fine (I cant have everything turned up to max...but its still better looking than SH4 at max). And this is at 1920X1080.

The CURRENT state of SH5 has me ticked as much as the next HONEST guy. Its unexcusable to release something in such a horrid state...and the DRM alone would make me give this sim a 4/10 (the first two weekends I owned it I couldnt play it!).

I also agree with you that Im SICK of game publishers releasing half finished products.... and I find it insulting that UBI is relying on MODS to FREELY fix thier broken garbage.

At the same time inaccurate comments and immaturity makes people question this reviews credibility. And if I paid him to do this review....I would want my money back.

[Stormin Norman]

Originally Posted by Faamecanic

This review was as full of FAIL as Ubisoft and this release of SH5.

The Seamen part just demonstrates unprofessionalism.

The pointing out of "too many ladders" "problems going up and down them" "Type VII only doing 7 kts" and several other errors show the reviewer really didnt spend time with the sim.

If he has trouble going up and down the ladders....then he should stick with Mario Kart or some other side-scrolling console game.

That review was pathetic, it's not even journalism. This hack focused on his gay sense of humor too much, and on the sub sim too little. Wtf can this be called a "REVIEW".? Did he discuss the campaign? How about the TDC? He mentioned getting his crew to select parts of the ship to attack, that's all. Two many ladders?? What all 2 of them? And he cannot get over that he has to move from place to place him his uboat

The whole thing is a joke.

[EAF274 Johan]

I'm no native English speaker so puns about seamen are totally lost on me, and I'm willing to concede that the "7 knots" reference could have been a typo.

With those two things out of the way, I find I have to agree with most of the review It does a good job at pointing out that the whole "making it accessible for the casual player" business is complete nonsense when basic game functions are unexplained or unintuitive. And yes, I too find myself stuck at a ladder more than once (I get the trick for going up, eventually, but going down always takes several tries). Really, if I had to write a review the score I gave wouldn't be much higher.

And still I find myself playing SH5

[Zedi]

I wonder how much game experience this guy can have by writing "Ubisoft also seems to have forgotten one of the ten commandments of FPS game design; don't put too many ladders in your levels..."

If he can't climb 2 short ladders in SH5, he is dead meat in any serious rush style FPS where u have to climb up/down very fast many ladders on buildings and so. And this guy gets paid to make reviews... doh

[janh]

I'd say the review doesn't stand up to the standards that subsim members as insiders and well-versed players of such simulations would hope for. And it doesn't come anywhere near a review like Neals, but he of course exactly knows what to look for.

But I think the message of both reviews are pretty much the same. If something, then this review shows a bit what a casual gamer with no subsim experience and just a game in mind would think.

[Nordmann]

Which is exactly why sims should never be made with the casual gamer in mind; they cannot grasp even the simplest of tasks, such as climbing a couple of ladders. Silly Ubi, thinking they could find a middle ground, when there isn't one!

[subsimlee]

Originally Posted by Agustus

bit-tech.net is a very reputable tech website. I've used them on many occasions for reference and have found their reviews to be quite accurate.

And I happen to agree with this review too. You guys can zero in on the "seamen" comment all you want to turn it into a "this isn't a good review." But he provided two pages worth of accurate commentary on the game as is, without mods and with the lousy DRM issues. He also gave it props for trying to do expand the game with the RPG flavor. It just turned out to be a lousy mechanic for this type of game.

I know everyone is trying really, really hard to like this game despite the drawbacks. But sometimes the truth just plain hurts and this review is a lot more truthful than the "it's not so bad" comments I'm reading.

Amen!

[Zedi]

Originally Posted by Nordmann

Which is exactly why sims should never be made with the casual gamer in mind; they cannot grasp even the simplest of tasks, such as climbing a couple of ladders. Silly Ubi, thinking they could find a middle ground, when there isn't one!

I agree with that, SH should not exist for casual players and it should be a very hardcore game. Actually, beside the bugs, this bothers me most.. this game is so simple and easy.

Just looking to the players logs on ubi anybody can see how casual this game is now. Over 3 million tonnage sunk in just few weeks is ridiculous for a serious sim. Sinking one ship should be a serious business, not to mention escaping from Scapa alive. Even with 100% realism SH5 is very easy and to get killed you actually need to commit suicide or to ram a heavy escorted battleship on full speed

[pythos]

I read only the first part of this review and realized that the reviewer is a know nothing, dumb a**

"why would any one want to have a first person perspective of a submarine" or other such drivel met my eyes, along with many references to seamen (homo erotic fascination or something?)

I usually give reviews a fair chance, and full read, but this one, may take a while for me to get the will to plow my way through it.

I am sorry, beginning a review on a sim by complaining about aspects that bring it closer to reality is no way to make me think you know Sh*t about sh&t when it comes to reviewing sims.

Almost like the whiny ba*&ards going on about how the virtual cockpits of flight simulator and combat flight sim Obstructed your view. Geeze.

[daemonofdecay]

Originally Posted by Faamecanic

I also agree with you that Im SICK of game publishers releasing half finished products.... and I find it insulting that UBI is relying on MODS to FREELY fix thier broken garbage.

At the same time inaccurate comments and immaturity makes people question this reviews credibility. And if I paid him to do this review....I would want my money back.

Seconded. SHV does not deserve anything more than a 6 / 10 at the very highest. I am one of those who has never had a problem with the DRM in the least, but the fact that it is there is still reason enough to lower their score a few points

But this review is ridiculous and full of inaccuracies. It's one thing to dislike a game, but this review seemed like he played for 10 to 15 minutes and then wrote down his already preconceived notions on how "bad" the game was.