Steel Fury Discussion

[Skybird]

JScones,

I must say that you and some others exaggerate a bit. I did not say anything that could be understood as "my review being the ultimate and authoritive word" on it, as you put it. I just indicated here and in the simHQ forum, that a review is about to be released and that it will disagree a bit with what is said on SF so far, and one guy at lighthouse got me a bit engaged in a discussion about what he said - and that was what I would have described to be the utimate authoritive word on his opinion. Magnum of sim HQ also has announced here and at simHQ that he is about to release a review next week, and his preview was psoitive - and people leave him alone over his announcement. Me preparing people a bit that I do not see it as positive, gets engaged even before the text is released!

But that brief note already was enough to earn me five mails meanwhile, of very angry and personal attacking content, two just arrived this morning, three yesterday morning, and one of them, as I said at simHQ, almost qualifies as a hate mail. Now what you say on that attitude being ultimate and authoritive? My two brief informations on a reivew coming were enough to already bring up many people against me, and trying to engage me in disucssions about my review, pushing me into a defensive posture - although they even have not read it!

I did it at simHQ, and I ask here again: hold your breath and criticsm until he review has been released, then read and consider it, then give me also some right to disagree with maybe your own views and give me some space to have my own opinion - and what is then left of it and you think is badly done by me - for that you can crucify me - after the review has been released. I explained my reasons why I think it is a good game, but a sub-standard sim, its all there. I hope that request is reasonable enough for everybody now.

Meanwhile, until Neal has set it up hopefully today, and speaking as a moderator now, I strongly recommend and kindly ask you all to withhold any further discussion about this review that none of you know so far, until it is released. Feel free to continue the debate once it is released, but until then: please put it voluntarily on temporary interrupt, if you please. I don't think that is too much asked for.

[ICDP]

I believe the reason is that you seem have destroyed any illussion of objectivity to do an unbiased review Skybird. You have sated publicly on at least 4 forums that you don't like Steef Fury because it doesn't compare well to SBP PE. Anyone with a modicum of simulation experience will know that the two should not be compared. You have stated that in your opinion SF is more of an action game, clearly this statement is very confusing. How can a sim with realistic tank physics, optics, tank operation and ballistics be deemed an action game? As a reviewer it is impossible not to compare to other similar sims/games but the comparisons should be on an apples v apples basis. I must admit that your constant comparisons to SPB PE made me scratch my head in bewilderment. I have both sims and I do not believe they are comparible since they model different eras and technology. Granted it is possible to compare AI behaviour or mission scripting up to a point but overall the comparison of a $40 mainstream sim to a $120 specialist militarty training aid is an invalid one.

Now please don't take this as an attack upon you, I am simply explaining the reasons why some on these forums seem to have adopted a defensive/aggressive to your stance on Steel Fury. Also the fact that Magnum on SimHQ has not been attacked is because he hasn't been publicly comparing it to a modern, expensive and military standard tank simulation.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by ICDP

I believe the reason is that you seem have destroyed any illussion of objectivity to do an unbiased review Skybird. You have sated publicly on at least 4 forums that you don't like Steef Fury because it doesn't compare well to SBP. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence will know that the two should not be compared. You have stated that in your opinion SF is more of an action game, clearly this statement is very confusing. How can a sim with realistic tank physics, optics, tank operation and ballistics be deemed an action game?

Now please don't take this as an attack upon you, I am simply explaining the reasons why some on these forums seem aggressive to your stance on Steel Fury. Also the fact that Magnum on SimHQ has not been attacked is because he hasn't been publicly comparing it to a modern, expensive and military standard tank simulation. A comparison that is clearly not a very valid one.

First, in fact I have said in the forums that I once planned but actually did not compare it to SBP, and skipped a previously planned chapter on detailed comparison for being pointless - the healdine is there, and then I say why it makes not much sense for the reasons you guys are mentioning as well: that SBP simply is too much ahead in developement. My remarks on SF vs SBP are short, therefore. I also explain my understanding of what contributes to a simulation actually being a simulation: and just correct driving and shooting physics is not enough, by far not.It is about how believable the virtual reality is that you are confronted is, and the levels of freedom it gives you, and the interaction between it and you, and the quality of it's reaction to you. On an abstract level, such things could be compared - not only between SF and SBP, but very different types of sims, too.

Second, I quote from simHQ:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Nevertheless, certai9n aspects of general quality can be compared between these two sims - or Falcon4 and SHIII. These are items that do not rely on the simulated ocntent, but "surrounding" factors like ergonomy of interfaces,handloing issues, attention to specific details that cost or add immersion, and so on. Seen that way, SBP and SF can be compared indeed. but the quality gap regharding "simulation" and "AI" is so huge in this comparsion that including a detailed comparison proved to be pointless.

I again ask you all to wait with my crucification until you have read the review that maybe already today will be out. You all are free to see it different than me, and still: there are some people as well who see it much like me. I gave my reasons for what I liked and what not. but you will need to read them first.

"Simulation" versus "game" is not problematic as long as one sees it not as different entitities but as the two opposing poles at the two ends of a specturm. You can move the general sliders more to the one or more to the other side. SBP is a training tool for the military - however , most public customers will use it like any game they use, and it serves that role quite well - despite the sim-heavy element. To say SBP cannot be used as a game, is nonsense. I just does not put much effort on the usual surropunding package features of games, but whether you use it as a game or a seriour trainer, depends on your approach to it. The degrees of freedom to vary this approach, differs with the various games/sims.

Its like with FS: you can tune its options so easy that it is almost a pure, simplistic action flyer. You can tune it up, replace the cockpits and FM, and approach it with charts and maps, and you can copy procedures and behavior from reality - then you are in a whole different league. But never will an action shooter offer you similiar degrees of freedom in how to appraoch it and how to take the game.

Yes, I think SBP is the superior tank simulator. No - I do not make a big issue of it in the review.

And third, I am getting a bit tired of endlessly needing to defend myself over a review that so far nobody knows in details. Therefore, this thread gets locked until the review has been released. It's a bit ironic that I announced that review coming and that it disagrees with wide opinion in order to prepare people for it and avoid right that what I seem to have caused now. Obviously the wrong decision by me. Next time I let it fall down from heaven and onto people's head like a steel hammer.


This thread gets unlocked again once the review is out.

[Skybird]

A pre-release of my review now is available:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...d=1#post996827

Feel free to continue to discuss and debate and share your opinions on the game.



This thread is now re-opened.

[stabiz]

I somehow get the feeling the devs have stolen your lunch money or something back in the day. This review is one of a kind, in the way that it differs from all others I have read.

And more SBP-nonsense?

Do you or do you not consider the Silent Hunter series simulations?

[GlobalExplorer]

Thanks for a very honest review. I will play the demo again before I make my decision.

To all the people attacking sb, I may not like him, but why can't you accept his ****ing opinion? The man has a right to warn others that he did not like the game. I am sick and tired of those who lead others blindly into another pointless purchase after another, just for the sake of not rocking the boat.

Lack of immersion is a big issue, and the comparison to IL2 is valid. How many people bought it only because everyone repeated how perfect it was, only to find out later how lifeless it is?

[HunterICX]

Originally Posted by GlobalExplorer

but why can't you accept his ****ing opinion?

thats the beauty about Opinions, it can be accepted or simply not.
because I've my own opinion which differs from another, or has some similarity.

Originally Posted by GlobalExplorer

I am sick and tired of those who lead others blindly into another pointless purchase after another, just for the sake of not rocking the boat.

I skip reviews due the fact above, its his opinion about his experience, I rather try it on my own (DEMO's or Rental) to see how it is and how I experience it, I do have ears for real problems like when the game does not work properly like been proofed in TvT34.

HunterICX

[Pillar]

I pretty much agree with the review.

[Skybird]

I got more PMs yesterday, of course since it is private I do not identify the sender, but in one of them the sender said this which really is worth to be remembered:

"Great review! It does not define the game, just your perception of it."

And that is what it is about. Approaches to a game, expectations, demands all differ, and it makes not much sense to start fighting about such differences. Of course I am focussing on my own perception of it - how to do it any different? It'S about MY level of tolerance for things I see as being done not too well, and it is about MY demands of what I want to see in a tanksim in order to call it that. Neal is more forgiving in his reviews than I am, everybody of you who is around long enough to remember the times of Sub Command, will remember the controveries back then. You can bet that his review of SF would be different and probabaly more positive than mine, while a review of TvT done by me probably would be more negative than his is. Our approaches and expectations simply are different. And thus his review will be as much focussed on HIS perception of the game, as has my review focussed on my perception.

Can it ever be any different? The box reads "an epic tank battle simulator". This pretty much set the standard for me to which I compared it all, so to speak. and I found it to be not epic, but small in mission designs, (thank Goid, since evn the reocmmend spec did not aloow the game to be run at reasonable frames at higher than low and low-medium settings), and why I am hesitant to call it a simulator, I have explained in the review, it has much to do with questionable AI, the way the gameplay unfolds, and as far as I am concerned: lacking immersion.

Some may have noted that I have mistaken the classification labels. the depicted Panzerkampfwagen IV of course are not the Tigers as which I called them - the Tiger was version VI, with the Panther being version V. My apologies for that mismatching of names. Since I did not go into system specifics at all, my fault thank God has had no further consequences.

[porphy]

Thorough review, and it is quite clear what you see as shortcomings of the game, and why.

Sometimes I wonder why it seems to be so difficult to make a good simulation that comes also with immersion and atmosphere. Or is it that when simulation falls short in some vital areas like AI, tactics, etc, the immersion goes out of the window quite quickly? It's all about illusion, a good simulation doesn't let you see through to the level of mechanics in most circumstances, and also keep producing believable behavior and results from a wide array of player actions. In less stellar simulations you are presented with an environment which clearly is made of puppets on strings and a puppet master that struggles to make anything good with his material!

Fires up SPB Pro Pe and prepares to be carried away again

cheers Porphy

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by porphy

Sometimes I wonder why it seems to be so difficult to make a good simulation that comes also with immersion and atmosphere. Or is it that when simulation falls short in some vital areas like AI, tactics, etc, the immersion goes out of the window quite quickly? It's all about illusion, a good simulation doesn't let you see through to the level of mechanics in most circumstances, and also keep producing believable behavior and results from a wide array of player actions. In less stellar simulations you are presented with an environment which clearly is made of puppets on strings and a puppet master that struggles to make anything good with his material!

Couldn't agree more.

[melin71]

I have played the game for some days now, and im just love it! best tanksim I have played seens panzer Elite. I did bought T34 vs tiger, and that too is a good game, but not so good as steel fury, way to few missions in TvsT. I have not played trow all mission yet and im not playing in full realism yet, and still i love the game. I guess that some great mods will come to this game, i have allready put in the sound mod, only thing that it do miss multiplay, but i allmost allways play offline becourse all dam cheaters online. But is should be fun with a squad of something and usercreated battles.

saw some reviews on the game, comperd the game with steel beast, like compard silent hunter 4 with a nuclar sub. plain stupid.


sorry for my bad english.

[Lieste]

This is a new one

Messages about some bugs started to appear soon after release of the western version of Steel Fury. We were rather surprised, because most of these bugs were not met in the russian version of the game neither before patches, nor after them.
The first bug is the absence of gunsight reticle in PzKpfw IV F2. It is rather critical, because it is absolutely impossible to aim without reticle, even if you don't care how the sight actually works and you don't make any range corrections. The analysis of the game resources has shown that there are errors in the description of the PzKpfw IV F2 gunsight. Besides, muzzle velocities for some projectiles differ from the russian version. Velocities of HE and HEAT projectiles for PzKpfw IV F2 are among them. It is rather critical too, because muzzle velocity influences trajectory of projectile's flight greatly, as well as range. Mechanism of range corrections for HE and HEAT projectiles of the PzKpfw IV F2 would work completely wrong, even if the gunsight reticle was present in the western version of Steel Fury.
The second bug is the problem with tracks damages. It is absolutely unexpected to us. Crewmen cannot leave the tank for repairing tracks in russian version of the game. There is an "auto Track repair" setting in the russian game options too, but if it is switched on, nobody leaves the tank. Russian version does not have possibility to loose tracks by pressing "T" key (what is it ever done for in western game version, I wonder?). And the driver obeys orders after repairing of tracks.
We have found other things in game resources, which are absent in russian version. They are files of unknown missions which are not present in the game; descriptions of sights which are not used anywhere. It seems that some other bugs can show up in future in western version of the game only.
Graviteam - the Steel Fury developer is not responsible for all these defects and bugs for sure, because russian version of the game is free from these bugs. The reason why Discus Games(localizator) and Lighthouse Interactive(western publisher) have released their own buggy version instead of translating russian version is not absolutely clear to us.
Considering all aforesaid, we have decided to create a patch which will change the unreliable western version of Steel Fury into stable russian version. All text, subtitles and sounds are kept from the western version. The rest is taken from the russian game.

Russian Steel Fury modding community.
-Hemul
-egorOgr
-Tanx

[Boats]

Well that explains why I'm always throwing tracks. With the T34 I can't get more than 500 yards before the track comes off.

The first time it happened I was in the gunners position, the next thing I know I'm outside the tank and the side of the tank is in front of me rocking. I did an external look around and saw two crew members at the front of the tank making motions as if they're working with lug wrenches. When in this position in the first person view you can really see how detailed the tanks are on the inside because the side of the tank becomes transparent.

Another bug I think they've included is a weak hit event. As in nothing really happens to your view (like maybe shake a little) nor do you hear anything unusual when your tank is hit by higher caliber guns. All you get is a message that your getting hit. The rifle caliber ammunition is clear when it pings against the armor.

[stabiz]

http://www.lighthouse-interactive.co...29b8569ef98acd