Is this it?

[AVGWarhawk]

I visited his site and now that I know the Devs are here with us

That is the cool thing. They are here and listening, doing what they can to satisfy all. IMHO that is just great. It is like having a mechanic under the hood of your car fixing things while you drive around. So as far as customer support and concern for their creation, they get a high five from me A lot has been put into the game at our request yet most would prefer to see the glitches/bugs. It is just the nature of the beast sometimes. As for me, I sail with a repaired radar.

[WernerSobe]

AMEN!


good said. Im afraid its again nothing more then talking to a wall. Ubi is only interested in Money not in the producs they publish and even less in this forum.

[Skybird]

I cannot different than agree with the starting post of scrapser - essentially it is the same that I have preached since years, especially where he says:

The solution here is to stop buying software from a company once it's known they will release incomplete products to the public. Make them accountable or this will only get worse. Of course I realize the vast majority of the buying public knows nothing of this issue and is out there blindly buying garbage and being wowed by all the pretty bells and whistles, so I'm not expecting anything but it still remains that our purchase is our vote and as long as people keep buying crap, the companies out there will gladly supply more.

"Consumers are to economics as voters are to politics."

Everytime you buy something, you are saying "Yes" to whatever it is...whether it be an incomplete piece of software or an overpriced house or condo. You are saying you accept, condone, and agree with the quality of what you're buying and the price you are paying for it.

so again I say: people, vote with your wallets. Show some adultry, and do not buy everything just because it was released. Don't trust it, you have little reasojn to do so, usually. Wait some weeks or months, wait for the dust to settle down, observe how the company behaves, if they patch, and if they do it determined, or half-hearted only. DO NOT BUY IT BEFORE IT IS CLEARLY IN AN ACCEPTABLE STATE AND CONDITION CONCERNING FUNCTIONALITY. Do not complain for features you wanted but that are not there and never were promised, but insist on that what was advertised is working reliably. hold them accountable for what they say you will get for your money - take them by their word. Publishers expect to make the better part of the expected income in the first weeks after release - and if customers are hesitent in this timephase, for the game is damaged, then this drop in sales is hurting them, and sends a strong message of demanding that it does not get released if it is not in order.

But if you accept to buy broken things, then you deserve nothing better than just getting broken things, for you showed your willingness to pay for broken things. Your own fault that such practice has become the rule in business, then.

Show some maturity, and patience. Wait some time after release and see how it developes. I rarely buy software these days, but when rushing the deal and not checking it first, I got burned, whereas taking my time and monitoring what a company is doing concerning it's software developement has rewarded me with stable and great software that delivered what it was advertising. I avoided much crap that way, and saved money, and did not support bad customer service and questionable quality orientation. If the majority of people would be hesitent like i am, some companies would die and we must not miss them, others would understand the message and adapt to the demands for better quality and honesty, and these would be those that would give you better quality titles in the future. A worthy investement, imo. But buy willingly every half-finished piece of code, every collection of bugs, every gallery of broken details that were advertised to you - and companies learn only one message from this: "we get away with it - so why should we do it any better?".

And that the software in question is the only one in a long time that appears in your favourite genre - does not change this bitter truth a bit. I would not buy a tank sim that is in a poor shape just because it is the only tank sim released since ten years. What sense does that make? To me, none. I am not doomed to be a victim of my reflexes only. I have a will by which I could decide wether to say Yes or No.

And each one of you can do that, too. If you are too impatient for that, you have in my eyes no right to complain about bugs or broken games then, because you tolerate and even almost provoke business practices that leads to them.

Maybe you find it worth to praise somebody taking your money, and then he's taking months to deliver, and repair, and fix it. Well, it is a qualitative question. If we talk about minor issues, and ongoing improvement beyond the originally advertised scale, then it is great support, yes. But if it is about basic repairs and fixing essential, basic stuff , then it is not, but is an indicator that at no cost it should have been released so early.

[TDK1044]

Sigh.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by TDK1044

Sigh.

Spare your sighs. I talked critically about publishing companies, not developers.

[John Channing]

Quote Skybird:

Spare your sighs. I talked critically about publishing companies, not developers.

Which, in this case, are one and the same.

And I doubt my wife would let me show some adultry. I'll ask.

JCC

[scrapser]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I cannot different than agree with the starting post of scrapser - essentially it is the same that I have preached since years, especially where he says:

Actually, I think I've changed my tune on that statement. It sounds good on paper but is never really going to happen...and besides, where would we draw the line on what constitutes an acceptable product and who's not making it? It would be unrealistic I think.

I think the more constructive approach is what is happening here...having a dialog of ideas and things tried. This is where we are and where we must move forward from.

[kiwi_2005]

Originally Posted by scrapser

This is not a rant.

Anyway, I'm hoping there will be another patch that brings this sim to the standard we all expect (i.e., "finished"). I bought the game the day it was released and still have not played it. I patched 1.3 last night but today have started reading about the issues that still remain (mag torpedoes always on, transparent crew on deck, non-functioning periscope animation, to name a few). Incredible!

Go on install the game!

Mag Torpedoes? I have no idea i just load and fire away.
Transparent crew always on? Nope mine dont look transparent.
Non function periscope animation. Nope it works.

Played one patrol since patch 3, SS boat 1941, and must of had one of the best patrols since owning the game. Attacking a taskforce the AI do now ping and attack you like they should i spent more time evading the taskforce than attacking them. Plus it was just on evening, a storm happening and only 180 feet of water beneath me.

This is a great game. You should first load her up and try the game yourself then come back here and see if you have the same thoughts.

[ A little Aussie gaming magazine gave Silent Hunter 4 a 9/10 score said its the best subsim to come out since Aces of the Deep a better update from silent hunter 3. Just recently SH4 was added in their top 100 of best games. The reviewer has been reviewing subsims since Fast Attack so is no noob. Yes shock horror i expected a score of 7, yet he gave it a 9. PCPowerplay might not be known in the states or UK well enough but they have a 300 thousand plus following of gamers.]

9 out 10. Gotta love the aussies

[jdkbph]

Originally Posted by kiwi_2005

9 out 10. Gotta love the aussies

Does UBI advertise in that mag?



JD

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by John Channing

Which in this case are one and the same.

And I doubt my wife would let me show some adultry. I'll ask.

JCC

That is an interesting point you make there John, (not the adultry one), but the one that the publishers and developers are one and the same. Are any of the developers also on the Board of Directors of Ubi that you know of?

[John Channing]

Nope... they are not. They are employees of Ubisoft Romania Studios.

Ubisoft is a huge, international corporation.

JCC

PS She said "No way, even if Skybird advises it".

[Shiplord]

Originally Posted by kiwi_2005

Transparent crew always on? Nope mine dont look transparent.

- activate environment effects
- activate volumetric fog
- start quick mission "Against all odds"
- go to bridge
- look at the sailor behind you

Non function periscope animation. Nope it works.

not the scope animation itself, the animation of the moving brass scope pipes inside the coning tower is now switched off (worked until this patch)

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by John Channing

Nope... they are not. They are employees of Ubisoft Romania Studios.

Ubisoft is a huge, international corporation.

JCC

PS She said "No way, even if Skybird advises it".

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

You are right about Ubi. Until I googled it I did not realise just how big this company is. My first game (apart from arcade) was Myst and I still think the graphics in that game have not been surpassed.

[Kippling]

In response to OP:

I agree wholeheartedly. It was totally unacceptable for UBI to release this game when they did, in it's unfinished state. I too bought it soon after realease and I was dismayed at the state it was in. Yes, there are pressures to release a game as soon as possible, but that does not mean a game should be published when it is essentially not finished.

I do some coding as part of my job too, I'm a control systems engineer. I too am under pressure to get projects finished within a certain time frame, but at the end of the day if something doesn't work as intended it simply shouldn't be considered finished and ready for use. Imagine this: You've bought a new car, but everytime you use the air conditioning or open a window the engine cuts out. You'd want your money back, right? Just because a game costs less than a car doesn't invalidate that reasoning, it's still acceptable to want it to work as it should when you buy it.

As for the people saying 'I dont care, thats just the way it is with software', you're not helping the situation. The fact that you're willing to just suck it up and get ripped off without complaining just means it's going to happen again. Make some noise and try and get your money back, whatever. Dont let this big publisher get away with selling you faulty software.

[maerean_m]

It's called greed .

They let the dev team work for 2.5 years on SH3 and it got the 100 mark from Neal.

When it was time for SH4 they gave it 11 months. When the time was up, they sent it to be written on the dvd. The game manual was hit even harder since it had to be translated in so many languages. Many of the game's features where not even implemented when the manual had to be finished. That's why many "screenshots" in the manual are actualy design mock-ups done in Photoshop (e.g. Crew management screen).

In short, it's called greed and greed dehumanizes people (and ruins perfect games like Silent Hunter).
It's plain wickedness to not have let Silent Hunter shine out of the box and be a contender for the game of the year, the way SH3 was.

It was only the quality of the dev team that managed to get these results in such a short time .