PDA

View Full Version : GameSpy finally got around to reviewing SH3



quillan
04-09-2005, 07:37 AM
Five Star rating! Read for yourself:

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/silent-hunter-iii/602818p1.html

Hertston
04-09-2005, 10:29 AM
Glad to see they noted the use of Starforce as one of the few downers. Hopefully the Ubi suits might finally get the message.

Subsim
04-09-2005, 01:03 PM
Five out of Five stars. This review was written by Tom Chick, unquestionably the foremost game reviewer (as well as a journalist and TV actor).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>This is a classic game that deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as F-19, Longbow 2, and European Air War. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Five stars out of five-- a "perfect" score. I applaud Mr. Chick for resisting the urge to drop a half-star to 4.5 just to keep some whiney b*tches off his back. SH3 is not "perfect" but it easily deserves the highest rating.

This is serious plus for SH3, way to go Ubisoft http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Neal

scharmers
04-09-2005, 03:22 PM
Tom is pretty much a no-B.S. guy (even though his Falcon 4 and Deus Ex reviews are still being panned to this day). I think it's fair to give SHIII five stars, since it pretty much completely covers what it was supposed to cover, does it with flair and style, and has single-handedly dragged immersion and playability, missing in simulations for many many moons (DO YOU HEAR ME THEN, OLEG??), back to sims.

--scharmers

Wolf52371
04-09-2005, 03:51 PM
Right on the mark. But i think he may need a geography class: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> From land-locked Romania... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

scharmers
04-09-2005, 04:19 PM
No U-Boat operations in the Black Sea....

Beeryus
04-09-2005, 04:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by scharmers:
has single-handedly dragged immersion and playability, missing in simulations for many many moons (DO YOU HEAR ME THEN, OLEG??), back to sims. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah. I always thought it was a sad commentary on the state of the simulation industry that Oleg Maddox has been so highly regarded in recent years. I mean his IL-2 games are pretty, but they don't have a lot of depth. If he was up against a REAL simulation developer - like if Dynamix was still around, his games would be decidedly second-rate. It's good to see that reviewers are finally recognising that. Maybe the next batch of sims will have a bit more to them than nice graphics.

Chuck_Older
04-09-2005, 05:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Beeryus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by scharmers:
has single-handedly dragged immersion and playability, missing in simulations for many many moons (DO YOU HEAR ME THEN, OLEG??), back to sims. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah. I always thought it was a sad commentary on the state of the simulation industry that Oleg Maddox has been so highly regarded in recent years. I mean his IL-2 games are pretty, but they don't have a lot of depth. If he was up against a REAL simulation developer - like if Dynamix was still around, his games would be decidedly second-rate. It's good to see that reviewers are finally recognising that. Maybe the next batch of sims will have a bit more to them than nice graphics. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I agree that there is a certain depth lacking in the Il-2 series compared to games such as European air war, I can't agree that the Il-2 series is just pretty graphics. Oleg Maddox is much more than a game developer, and more than a WWII aviation buff. He's a real engineer in the aerospace field, and earned his bread and butter as an aeronautical engineer for some time before deciding to make PC games and simulations.

The lack of depth you mention is a real thing, and that's why some players (like myself) take it upon themselves to use the tools included in the Il-2 series to make user-made campaigns that go into much more detail than any dynamic campaign included in the Il-2 series. Some mission makers have made 100 mission + campaigns that are quite good, and very immersive. My little 34 mission campaign is, I will admit with some small bit of pride, well received as an immersive bit of fun that takes the player someplace the sim didn't before, even with a similar campaign in existence.

I do however agree with you 100%, something is lacking in the Il-2 series. I prefer the Il-2 sims because they replicates the sensation of flight better than the others, but there is a real sense of detachment from your surroundings. EAW did that part much better. Even CFS3 did that better, although the black marks against CFS3 are many more than against Il2 or any of the other sims in the family

In SHII, they got that feeling of being connected, to a large degree, right off the bat, and that is important in a sim like SHIII moreso than in a flight sim, and it's an intangible thing- either it's there or it isn't, and SHIII has it. in Il-2 and it's family...we have had to provide that, to a certain degree, ourselves. the good news is that the results are often quite good. But Il-2 and it's family are much more than pretty graphics. Much more. It does, however, take a fair bit of investment in time and effort to bring it to it's potential. SHIII definitely hit closer to the mark than Il-2 did in that regard

Shard_6
04-09-2005, 05:28 PM
But pay attention to the multi-player ranking. The game is outstanding, I dont challenge that, but as a multi-player nut, I hope this is the focus of the maintenance team. I think they could get game of the year on this, as long as they take lessons learned from others and the options available on the multi end of things. My support is with them and I am looking forward to this.
Shard

Chuck_Older
04-09-2005, 05:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shard_6:
But pay attention to the multi-player ranking. The game is outstanding, I dont challenge that, but as a multi-player nut, I hope this is the focus of the maintenance team. I think they could get game of the year on this, as long as they take lessons learned from others and the options available on the multi end of things. My support is with them and I am looking forward to this.
Shard <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well that's true. But I also hope that single play isn't neglected because of that.

blue_76
04-09-2005, 05:31 PM
I've also been playing IL2 since forgotten battles came out.. I love many aspects about it, but the AI and the character customization are a bit lacking, but i have to say i'm very impressed with IL2 since its been around for a very long time and is still very popular.

Chuck_Older
04-09-2005, 05:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by blue_76:
I've also been playing IL2 since forgotten battles came out.. I love many aspects about it, but the AI and the character customization are a bit lacking, but i have to say i'm very impressed with IL2 since its been around for a very long time and is still very popular. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hopefully these are all lessons learned and will be addressed in 1C:maddox Games' Battle of Britain. Some players dislike it, but I think the fact that sim is basically a test-bed for things that will be in BoB is a really good sign. I'll just have to get some rudder pedals for when v4.0 comes out, I don't think the rocker on my X45 will cut it anymore

But I'll tell you what: SHIII is a better all-around sim that either Il-2 or FB was when they came out

MikeJW
04-09-2005, 07:35 PM
I only fly SP. The thing that turns me off from Il-2 and the following games is it's so dry I dont feel immersed. Even when in a fierce dog fight I dont feel like I'm in the game. In SH3 I feel like I'm part of a sub crew and in a war. It feels more, human I guess. Il-2 feels like machines fighting. Somehow SH3 makes you feel like your surrounded by living things. I cant explaine it well. If Il-2 or PF had this kind of immersion and atmosphere I'd still be playing them instead of looking for the next big WW2 FS.

Kpt_Zig
04-10-2005, 02:30 AM
Screw MP. MP became an excuse for shiftless developers to ignore SP, and that's why IL2 never satisfied. Technically brilliant, but souless.

SH3 is both technically brilliant AND full of soul. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

indylavi
04-10-2005, 03:23 AM
Kpt_Zig, I will agree with your statement 1,000% http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif IL-2 is great for MP. It's single player is just.... not awful but not really good either. I do like the user made campaigns a lot more than the dynamic ones. As stated in IL-2 I just feel like I'm playing a game. I don't really care if my wingman dies or what happens. In SH3 I do care if my men die and I do feel like I'm really there. IL-2 is a great game but it's hollow inside. Something I hope they fix. The SH3 dev team go it right though http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif