Is the game REALLY worth $125.00?

Are you being serious or are you trolling for trolling's sake? M$FS had a staff of how many to develop it? eSim have a programming staff of 1.

Even more reason why MSFS should have been sold for more and SBPE for less.

[3Star]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

I just noted in a movie clip that Skybird posted up that someone else made showing a TOW hitting a few twigs hanging from a tree branch and exploding - NOT destroying the twigs or the tree at all.

True, we're kindof wondering what to do about that sort of thing over in the Beta test crowd. The general opinion is it's not worth worrying over. As long as the AI gunner stops pumping rounds into the tree, we're happy enough. After all, you could hit the first branch, but a tree is more than a couple of branches. Just move a few feet, and you're sorted. Or switch to sabot rounds.

the public on release way less than $125.00 and that too was claimed to be a "military trainer".

After the fact, I believe. We were looking at it as a trainer, but it was already made and available for that to happen. The various sales of SB1 to the military (West Point, 3rd Infantry) were made with unit discretionary funds, not with the weight of TRADOC behind it. Other militaries bought it over time.

Why would the worlds militarys use a PC sim to train with when they have the real deal on the field?

Well, for the US Army, a tank costs $214 a mile to run, give or take. (4 gallons to the mile on fuel alone). Not to mention all the time and hassle taken to get to the field in the first place. Simulators are a hell of a lot cheaper. If it really is such a daft idea, I'm surprised that.. what, seven? eight? militaries have already purchased it and funded its development into SBP.

You just watch, in a few months the company will need and want more money so they will reduce costs to get a profit

What costs are they going to reduce? Not as if there's much overhead, the guy works out of his home!

The US would never buy this considering they can make their own. Look at America's Army - developed by the United States Army and is considered a FPS and infantry simulator!

I believe you'll find it was actually developed as a recruiting, not a training tool. Recruiting and Retention is a highly-funded part of the Army. By way of comparison, look at TacOps (Currently available at Battlefront.com) . That is currently in use by TRADOC for training in field-grade officers. It was developed by a single programmer (Major Holdridge, USMC Ret) and sold commercially by Avalon Hill. Over time, 16th Cav in Ft Knox saw it, and bought a license. (Any US Army serviceman may have a free copy). So guess what: The US Army, funded as it was, saw a COTS application, and bought it, funding its further development. This is exactly how SBP ended up in its current incarnation.

Another thing. The players tank is way too nurfed. How is it that an enemy tank can fire round after round at the players tank and yet it stays intact. To be a true simulator that means that the players tank should only be able to sustain as much damage as one of the enemy NPC tanks.

You have absolutely no idea what you're taking about, do you? To be a true simulator, it must be as real life happens, without regard to 'play balance.' History is replete with examples of tanks which take multiple (Dozens, in some cases) of hits, whilst dispatching lots of the enemy. Take the example of Michael Wittman's Tiger at Villers Bocage. One 88mm round each happily dispatched Sherman and Cromwells, while the 75mm guns coming back at him had all went 'boingggg'. I'm sure that the British were complaining about play balance. Or the Iraqis in 1991 for that matter, which had 125mm rounds bouncing off the front of M1s.

Difficulty settings should be an option considering that in real life it would only take about 1 round to take out your tank and crew.

Present your flank or rear in the sim, and it will only take one round to take out your tank or crew. Or, should you be in a Leopard 1, one round will probably do it from the front, as it's a lighter armoured tank.

Real-world is a very simple pentrate/no-penetrate situation. It takes a certain amount of force to penetrate armour. If the round doesn't have what it takes to punch through, it will bounce. Repeatedly throwing the same kind of round will result in.. gee.. repeated bouncing.

Another thing I've noticed is that the tanks in the sim glide across the ground and don't appear to follow the terrain as if it is light as a feather. My guess is that those of you that paid $125.00 for it wish you had back at least $60.00 of it if not more. If the company was smart they would have tried to reach the masses with the sim and sold it for a reasonable price from the beginning.

Hmm.. Looks like you're saying exactly what the developers have been saying all along. If you want a reasonably priced game where things like play balance come into play, and all the fancy eye candy which provides nothing to the gameplay, then you want to wait for SB2 to come out, which is more mass-market.

My recommendation? Don't buy the sim if you feel that way.

NTM

[Skybird]

SubSerpent,

you have a right on your opinion, but this does not mean that your opinion necessarily must be founded on solid facts and insight. Many points you said show you have not the needed knowledge to claim that you know what you are talking about. Some things you said are seriously messed up, and simply wrong. Your comparison to MSFS and america's army also illustrates that you see this software from a gamer's perspective - while eSim and me are saying time and again one should not do that. However, my simple recommendation is: don't buy it. It's your right not to do so. And it is the option that will serve best for you.

Several of the points you made are corrected and/or answered more competently in the interview I had with Ssnake (tbr).

BTW, many of the members of the developement team have been, or still are, tankers in active service. They know what they are dealing with. Possible that your imagination of what tank warfare is like (one shot = one kill, eh?! ), cannot rival that! Also, the software was bought for tens of thousands of dollars by the military of eight Western countries so far, sometimes after years of testing and considerating. You seriously think they did that because it all is so gamish and unrealistic and messed up? One license for a 10-head-classroom costs 18000 dollars - that roughly equals 15 life shots with training rounds on the gunnery range, or five hours in the hardware-embedded high fidelity simulatorsy.

As a matter of fact AA was not created by the army for training purposes. It is a game, if you haven't noticed. It's whole puposes is propaganda: to make players wanting to join the military once they are old enough, and to influence the social climate and public opinion in favour of the military, by propagating a certain, special impression and image of the military (and ignoring less welcomed harsh facts that are also part of a soldier'S life). The money for it's development came from funds related to the military's public relation management.

You can tell us about your intention not to buy SBP, and why, that is okay. You can also critizise my review, as long as you keep it fair and based on facts, not hear-say or your own imagination of how the software should have been in terms of "realism", in your opinion. But beyond that kind of statments keep it more civil and adult, please. Only my moderator function stops me to answer some of your points - and the way you bring them over - in a more aggressive way.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by frog7

Can some of the people who as this sim tell us what they think of it ......id like to hear more..iv read the review and it does look good id also like to know what spec people are playing it on...

http://www.steelbeasts.com/index.php...35fb772c6b991c

http://www.esimgames.com/sbprosysrecs.htm

The specs in my review are a bit dated, it seems
http://www.tanksim.com/reviews/steel_beasts_pro2.htm
But I describe en detail how frames are on my system with varying graphics options.

So with a 3 GHz P4, WinXP, 1 GB RAM, and an nVidia 5900Xt you are definitely on the safe side with a 1024 resolution, you can even try with low AA and AF settings, if you want (for me it was not worth it). compare your system to mine, and you may have an imporession if your rig will handle it.

I never said that I didn't want the software or the sim at all....True I said that I don't want the software or the sim at that cost! The cost is what is really bothering me. I am not trying to ridicule anyone here about their love or interest in mechanized military ground warfare. I love sims just as much as any other sim enthusiast on this sight and am not afraid to voice my opinion or speak my mind about what I feel is a rip-off. $125.00 is pricey and even some of you mentioned that before the game was even released. My original question was "Is it really worth it at that price" and no one here has truely explained why they think it's worth it for that much other than to say that it was developed by one guy that works from his home and that it's a simulator/training aid. My arguement is that so is MSFS 2005. It is truely used by training pilots and is every bit as useful as any other simulator/training aid program but on initial release was way cheaper to purchase than this one.

[Skybird]

The expected sale rate for SBP cannot compete with that of a Microsoft title. This is the major reason why it is so expensive: the more pieces you produce, the lower the costs per piece, the higher the overall profit, the more space you have to dumb the price. If a cost-heavy development like FS would expect the same low sale numbers like SBP, then it would not cost 125 dollars, but several hundreds of dollars, because the effort to develope it was more personnell- and cost-intensive.

What you see in features of SBP, as well as what features you do not see, is because of only one reason: the military customers demanded them, or they did not request them. These requests are reflecting the wishes of the military of what aspects they want to train. And this focus lies on training maneuver tactics, and for the classroom with 1:1 hardware replicas of the gunner's handles (you can buy them: 1000 dollars per piece): gunnery training. No game market and no private person decided on the design of SBP, but the military customer's demands alone. Because they are the true bread and butter for eSim - nut us private customers. We are too few in numbers. things that are not requested by the military should not be expected to find their way into SBP PE.

That'S why I and eSim say time and again: it is not a game, do not expect a game, if you think of it in terms of a game, DO NOT buy it. Much of the stuff you complained about in your posting above - is simply irrelevant. It is no driving simulator, it is no TOW-simulator, it is no mass-release to the game market. The focus of interest lies on other aspects - aspects that have been prioritzed by the military, not by the game market. If you approach this software with expectations and scale for comparison you have raised by what you have become used to by the use of games - then you necessarily must fail to see the quality of this software. It's focus and your focus are out of tune.

My honest recommendation for you is: do not buy it. I think you will be dissappointed, you interest and focus is another one than what this simulation could satisfy. at least try again in half a year, when at least one new vehicle will be available, maybe more 3D interiors - and the few flaws there are will have been patched out. I admit, the gunner-shoot-too-short-error currently must be regarded as not only a minor issue, in fact it can be very frustrating at times. but soon it will no longer be there.

BTW, I have seen two infantry simulations that also were used for training purposes, their interfaces were far more primitive, their handling "non-ergonomic" to the max, no true 3D, primitive maps in black white only,to handle it all was a severe pain. The one costed me around the price of SBP ( I regretted to buy it), the other costed 700 dollars if i would have ordered it (I didn't), both were or are in use in american academies. Compared to these is SBP is both cheap, and far superior.

[Mylo42]

Subserpent,.....

I see you got tired of being an arse over at the SHIII forums and decided to wonder over here to continue with your ways.

Don't buy SBP....please......and, get off of your parent's computer.

*sheesh*


Mylo42

P.S. Sky or anybody else attempting to engage in mature debate with Sub, you're wasting your breath, or, your fingertips, as it were. Maybe in a few years, when sub get's his driver's licence or his first girl friend, he'll lose interest in sharing his insight on forums and leave that to us 30-40-50 somethings that already have a car as well as a divorce or two under our belts. You'll see what I mean when Sub responds to this post.

[Skybird]

Everybody cool down now.

Each moderator has his own style of doing things. While constructive critizism and questions born of lacking knowledge certainly are allowed, and occasionally some temporary climb in temperature caused by misunderstandings between two people cannot be avoided, my moderating policy is such that I do not tolerate personally offending phrases or harsh language or rude words. Which also is forbidden by the forum rules, if you want to read them.

Repeating incidents like this will soon lead to the final screen that reads "Game Over".

[3Star]

Originally Posted by Mylo42

Subserpent,.....

us 30-40-50 somethings that already have a car as well as a divorce or two under our belts. You'll see what I mean when Sub responds to this post.

Hmm... 30.. check.
Car... check x2.

Divorce or two... Nope.. still need to work on that one. Not on my priority list of things to do, mind.

NTM

[Bluewings]

"Is it really worth it at that price"

Tree leaves cost nothing because of their sheer numbers .
Diamonds are expensive because of their rarity .

SB ProPE has no Competitor . It is the only Tank Simulator out there .
Thus $125 . As simple as that .

Buy it or not . It 's your wallet ...

Cheers .

[porphy]

Is it worth it? I'm about to find out! Faith is strong though, and it has increased after Skybird's review. Today SB PRO PE arrived and now I'm member of the the tank community as well. Coffee is made, work is put on hold and installation is about to commence.

Cheers Porphy

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by porphy

Is it worth it? I'm about to find out! Faith is strong though, and it has increased after Skybird's review. Today SB PRO PE arrived and now I'm member of the the tank community as well. Coffee is made, work is put on hold and installation is about to commence.

Cheers Porphy

Feedback welcomed!

[TankHunter]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

Yeah but it isn't too real after all. I just noted in a movie clip that Skybird posted up that someone else made showing a TOW hitting a few twigs hanging from a tree branch and exploding - NOT destroying the twigs or the tree at all. The troops in the game look like something from a 1980's PC game and haven't really been improved upon since SB1 which intially cost the public on release way less than $125.00 and that too was claimed to be a "military trainer". Obviously the game is not worth $125.00 considering MS Flight Sim 2005 is used to train real pilots how to fly and has WAY better graphics and modeling than SBPE. Not to mention that upon release was only $50.00 up to $65.00 for the Tin Case version. Those of you that insist that the game is worth every penny are lying to yourselves and know better but don't have the guts or are too spoiled to admit when you are wrong. There was no more put into the making of SBPE than any other simulator on the market - probably even less. Of course the company is going to tell you that it is geared towards the militaries of the world and that it's not a sim for the casual gamer but think about this. Why would the worlds militarys use a PC sim to train with when they have the real deal on the field? It's just a ploy to suck you into paying $125.00 suckers. You just watch, in a few months the company will need and want more money so they will reduce costs to get a profit. The US would never buy this considering they can make their own. Look at America's Army - developed by the United States Army and is considered a FPS and infantry simulator! I honestly think that $125.00 is an incredible figure for a piece of software that isn't an operating system or some type of developement software. Another thing. The players tank is way too nurfed. How is it that an enemy tank can fire round after round at the players tank and yet it stays intact. To be a true simulator that means that the players tank should only be able to sustain as much damage as one of the enemy NPC tanks. Difficulty settings should be an option considering that in real life it would only take about 1 round to take out your tank and crew. Another thing I've noticed is that the tanks in the sim glide across the ground and don't appear to follow the terrain as if it is light as a feather. My guess is that those of you that paid $125.00 for it wish you had back at least $60.00 of it if not more. If the company was smart they would have tried to reach the masses with the sim and sold it for a reasonable price from the beginning.

A. If you want good graphics, play Battlefield 2, or wait for SB2 to come out. If you want what militaries actually use, then go for Pro PE.
B. Militaries use PCs to train troops because it is much cheaper than the real thing. Same logic applies to why pilots are trained on flight sims. Also a computer generally wont kill you if you screw up.
C. Didnt West Point buy a few copies of SB1 a few years ago?
D. The reason why a tank can take round after round is because either the ammunition used has poor RHA penetration properties, or the tank has very good RHA protection. In other words, an M1 will take DM33 nicely, but the Leo1 may not survive the encounter.
E. It was not designed to be sold to "the masses." It was designed for training.

Originally Posted by Mylo42

Subserpent,.....

I see you got tired of being an arse over at the SHIII forums and decided to wonder over here to continue with your ways.

Don't buy SBP....please......and, get off of your parent's computer.

*sheesh*


Mylo42

P.S. Sky or anybody else attempting to engage in mature debate with Sub, you're wasting your breath, or, your fingertips, as it were. Maybe in a few years, when sub get's his driver's licence or his first girl friend, he'll lose interest in sharing his insight on forums and leave that to us 30-40-50 somethings that already have a car as well as a divorce or two under our belts. You'll see what I mean when Sub responds to this post.

You make me laugh! :rotfl: You are a weak person if you are working on your 2nd or 3rd marriage. I'm still on my first one and it's been going great for a decade now and still going strong. Perhaps you should stop wasting you money on tank sims and start spending more time and money on your current wife and family, else you might be all alone with nobody or anything but your lousy $125.00 tank sim. :rotfl:

Originally Posted by TankHunter

A. If you want good graphics, play Battlefield 2, or wait for SB2 to come out. If you want what militaries actually use, then go for Pro PE.
B. Militaries use PCs to train troops because it is much cheaper than the real thing. Same logic applies to why pilots are trained on flight sims. Also a computer generally wont kill you if you screw up.
C. Didnt West Point buy a few copies of SB1 a few years ago?
D. The reason why a tank can take round after round is because either the ammunition used has poor RHA penetration properties, or the tank has very good RHA protection. In other words, an M1 will take DM33 nicely, but the Leo1 may not survive the encounter.
E. It was not designed to be sold to "the masses." It was designed for training.

I don't give a solid terd about graphics and gameplay for games, sims, and or military trainers as long as the price tag matches what you get. This sim/trainer or whatever you call it is not worth the money to me and that's the bottom line. Perhaps you think it's worth it but then again you might be one of those rich snoots that can buy almost anything and waste money on cheap crap and brand names.


This is NOT the only tank sim out there. OFP has much better gameplay and tank gunnery than SBPE anyday and it's not even a tank sim. T72 is much better graphically than SBPE and is a tank sim although I don't think the gunnery in the game is all that and feels a bit too arcadish but then again, it is a simulator and it is affordable.