Is the game REALLY worth $125.00?

[SubSerpent]

I love sims, I really do so please be totally honest when replying to this. Is the game (with honest answers only) truely worth $125.00? I mean a person could buy a very nice video card for that amount of money or even two Xbox 360 games or 3-4 PC games. That is a WHOLE lot of money for game, IMHO. So is it really truely honestly worth it? I mean SHIII is considered a ground breaking Naval sim in regards to graphics and replayability considering it has a very nice random and dynamic campaign but IT only cost me $40.00 when I bought it brand new. It lacks in a few areas and not everything was or still is implemented into it the way I believe it was really meant to be (Considering UBIsoft wanted to get it out on the market ASAP and rushed their developers). Dangerous waters seems like a better comparison IMO to Steel Beasts Pro Edition. It is not the most remarkable graphically enhanced sim I have seen but the most sophisticated and educational. That game cost about $65.00 when I bought it from Battlefront.com about a year ago and I thought that was expensive but I had the money and hadn't bought anything for myself for awhile. But $65.00 is bearable IMO but it MUST be a truely remarkable game for it to cost that much. Only the most overhyped games and some of them are good don't take me wrong ever cost more than about $60.00-$75.00 considering DOOM III DVD Jewel case only cost me about $60.00 dollars when I bought it and same with COD2 which cost me $54.00. Those games were created by some TOP NOTCH companies with solid backgrounds in game developement and seemed somewhat reasonable but a bit pricey to me at even that amount.

So now I debate with myself "Is SBPE truely honestly worth the money". Honestly to myself I have to say "NO" and let this one go since I feel as though I'd be ripped off by paying that much for it. The graphics look 'OK' but they aren't the best I have seen, the gameplay is probably "Excellent" but even the gameplay in the original Steel Beast game was "Excellent" so why bother paying more money for what I already have? The ability to command several types of platforms is nice, but I would be happy with just one platform if that would knock the the price down about $80.00. I guess there is a limit for everyone and I guess $80.00 is as high as I would pay for a game in my life unless it was some next gen game from the year 2025 or something when inflation has increased to the place that it is common to buy a game at $125.00 which is the equivalent of todays $45.00-$50.00 margin.

[CCIP]

Perhaps one argument to disagree on this is if you stop treating it as a game and think of it as a "commercially-available version of a professional military training tool".

Personally, knowing the replay value and depth that sims have, I'd say a good sim is worth those 3 console games. If a polished version of SHIII sold for $125, I'd buy it, because it's worth that much in terms of value.

I don't think it's a rip-off. You get what you pay for. If you want a professional sim, you won't mind paying that. If you don't, buy those 3 other games and be happy. Everything is ruled by supply and demand. If the game's developers worried about low demand, they'd drop their price. But they aren't, this isn't even really their job, their job is making sims for the military - this is more of a "by the way" offshoot. Can you get this anywhere else, for any other price? I don't think so. So, it's put up or do without.

Personally, I'll find out if it's worth it once I get a job. That said, I've spent a lot of money on sims up to date (including controllers and other hardware I bought specifically for it, I must have shelled out a good $300 on Falcon 4.0), and I never regretted it! :)

[TteFAboB]

If you saved $125 every month (and kept the inflation from eating that) by 2025 you'd have $28,500, enough to build your own LAN House and command your friends on your own virtual tank platoon, or not, if 2025 is a post-thermonuclear-war world, then you'd probably have to buy a real [refurbished] M1A2 (equipped with a laser-cannon) instead to defend your local clan against mutant bandit raiders.

I'm buying SPB because I'm not buying a bunch of other games. After being severely dissapointed by "Battlefront II", "Republic Commando", "Empire at War" (modding might save this one), partially "Black & White 2" and others, I don't go out and buy every single good-looking game I see, as I know most games won't offer more than 3 months of gameplay. To me that is the key, replayability.

I'm still playing Jagged Alliance 2 (heavily modded), that game is worth $125 but if I remember I payed $19 for it.

I'm still playing X-Com:Ufo Defense (necrophiliac) and Terror from the Deep every now and then, those games, with horrible graphics, are worth $125 but I payed less than $20 again.

I've been playing X-Wing vs Tie Fighter since 1997 (and the previous ones before that), I don't even remember how much I payed for it but I know it was cheap, adding the Balance of Power expansion and the last game X-Wing:Alliance the total is still below $125. I have the original CD here, it's so old and has been spinning [very] hot for so long the colors are fading away.

If SBP will provide me entertainment for many years to come, it's worth it, because while I'm busy with it, I won't buy the latest shoe-box crappy First Person Shooter and spare myself from the dissapointment and save my money.

[3Star]

What the others said. It's a MilSpec sim, and is deliberately priced to make the casual gamer think twice about spending the money to buy it. Otherwise, it will be compared with other, run-of-the-mill games, and will then be slated for having moderate graphics, no campaign, and so on. Which are the last two things that the military are interested in. Thus, Esim decided that they would rather discourage such people from buying it, than to sell them to all and sundry, only to have people find out it wasn't what they thought it would be.

SB1 was the best play-hours-per-dollar I've ever bought. SBP/PE probably would come in pretty close. Basically, it's a niche piece of software. If you're looking for a traditional game, wait a year or two for SB2 to come out.

NTM

[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...

[kaptkirkU4467]

Old tankers save money for sims like this..I'm upto $40 now. :up:

[SubSerpent]

After reading several reviews of the game I understand it is NOT a game and is a military grade simulator. But the same arguement could be used for Dangerous Waters and it on release was only half the cost of Steel Beasts Pro Edition. However, I am still struggling with myself on whether or not to buy it at this $125.00 cost or to wait for cost to drop a bit. Dangerous Waters was picked up by another company and now it sells for nearly half of what Battlefront.com sold it for (From $65.00 down to $30.00 in less than a year). So I am just wondering if I shouldn't just wait for awhile and pay less for it. Plus by then there should be more updates for it and possible mods, so I would be getting the sim that some of you have now and then some for a LOT cheaper cost. So I won't let this one go forever but just for a year if it takes that for it to drop in price. If it doesn't drop that just means I will have to save about $10.42 a month for a year ($125.04) and get it then. Heck, I've already waited a long time for this sim, I guess I can wait a little longer. Well, back to SHIII and Dangerous Waters for me for awhile I suppose

[Raploc]

News Flash!! No you will have to pay $125 to get it. No short cuts. Comparing Dangerous Waters to SBPe is like comparing Counter Strike to VSB1.

[3Star]

With all due respect to DW, which I have, the two are not comparable. One is a mass-market game which relies heavily on real-world techniques, (and, frankly, is flawed/buggy), the other is a sim which approximates about as close as possible the individual mechanics of the different types of vehicles to a level of fidelity and reliability that is suitable for the primary customer's military use. Basically, when the US or any other navy in the world starts to use DW as an officially sanctioned training tool, get back to me. SBP is being used to keep soldiers alive. That's how good it is.

My experience to DW is exactly the opposite of what a lot of people will find for SB: I bought DW expecting a high-fidelity simulator, instead, I found a relatively shallow game. Esim are worried that people will be looking for a game, and instead get a high-fi sim.

NTM

[Skybird]

I did an interview with Ssnake, technical director of eSim, it will be released in some days, it depends on Neal. Ssnake will explain some views of the military what makes SBP attractive for them. Some pof his remarks were very surprising.

I must agree with 3star on what he said about DW and SBP. DW is a game with very strong sim-elements, and it was deliberately designed to be a game package, although for a niche-market. It is, imo, more bugged then SBP (although not that much like SC was). SBP is a professional training tool, and has no feature that was designed with a possebility of a game-release in mind. It also is in a technically better shape and condition, only one medium-to-heavy category bug, and a small handful of very minor ones, some of which evcen are not confirmed to be bugs appearing on all systems.

What also is a big difference is the customer service that Sonalysts and eSim are doing, and which made me turning away from Sonalysts, finally. SA is a defense contractor, and is the far bigger company of the two. eSim also is a defense contractor, although not on the scale like SA and in a different understanding, and it is much smaller. Nevertheless, although not having released a game, it's technical support, judged by the fast patching of SB1, and their published plans for supporting SBP, is far superior to SA - who is not able to have it's baby gotten into shape even after over one year. It also failed to do a thorough job with patching SC, which also was not substantially patched before over one year had gone by, despite the presence of some real showstoppers. Although smaller, eSim has the willingness to take better care of it's community, not only in terms of forum presence (which rivales that of SA easily, at any time, since years), but in deeds. They even halted all military offers of more lucrative contracts just to get the job with SBP PE done. That is what I call dedication to customers.



Okay, I expected that a comparison between SC/DW and SBP would come up on this board sooner or later, and I said what I have to say, and other did that, too. But we do not want a forum war here about people's preferences for this or that sim of their choice. So I would like to see this comparison beeing left behind now.

[Skybird]

After reading several reviews of the game I understand it is NOT a game and is a military grade simulator. But the same arguement could be used for Dangerous Waters and it on release was only half the cost of Steel Beasts Pro Edition. However, I am still struggling with myself on whether or not to buy it at this $125.00 cost or to wait for cost to drop a bit. Dangerous Waters was picked up by another company and now it sells for nearly half of what Battlefront.com sold it for (From $65.00 down to $30.00 in less than a year). So I am just wondering if I shouldn't just wait for awhile and pay less for it. Plus by then there should be more updates for it and possible mods, so I would be getting the sim that some of you have now and then some for a LOT cheaper cost. So I won't let this one go forever but just for a year if it takes that for it to drop in price. If it doesn't drop that just means I will have to save about $10.42 a month for a year ($125.04) and get it then. Heck, I've already waited a long time for this sim, I guess I can wait a little longer. Well, back to SHIII and Dangerous Waters for me for awhile I suppose

Box-release of SBP: read my lips: IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. you could wait for SB2, not before 2008 I expect, but that is a more game-like and less-detailed package than SBP. Again: there will be no box-release of SBP. They do not expect high sale snumbers. The price is due too the anticipated small sale number.

[Skybird]

What the others said. It's a MilSpec sim, and is deliberately priced to make the casual gamer think twice about spending the money to buy it. Otherwise, it will be compared with other, run-of-the-mill games, and will then be slated for having moderate graphics, no campaign, and so on. Which are the last two things that the military are interested in. Thus, Esim decided that they would rather discourage such people from buying it, than to sell them to all and sundry, only to have people find out it wasn't what they thought it would be.

SB1 was the best play-hours-per-dollar I've ever bought. SBP/PE probably would come in pretty close. Basically, it's a niche piece of software. If you're looking for a traditional game, wait a year or two for SB2 to come out.

NTM

The price was not calculated to scare gamers away. It simply is the minimum price at which they could do such a limited release. Noone ever exopected a mass-succeess. To use their own words: "what we have is a dedicated sim for the military and professionals. All we do is this: we just do not stop civilians to buy it."

[Mylo42]

This may sound odd but....

.....I was very excited about the fact that SBP was $125. This price tag supports the reviews on the sim in that....this is not just another game out there, but is, in fact, something different, something more substantial, ...a REAL sim if you will. Of course it's going to cost more, I would expect nothing less. If SBP was $65 I would have thought to myself, "Ya....military training aid my arse....what kind of military training aid can you buy for $65 ?" Again, the fact that it is twice that much at least gives me hope that it is for real. In all honesty, I would have put the price of a real military training aid closer to $500 so, I'm quite pleased with a $125 price tag.

As for the graphics of SBP and their "dated" appearance in some areas ? Again, sounding odd but, this too made me think that perhaps SBP is a REAL sim. I figure a REAL sim would make the graphics as good as they need to be and focus more dev resources on getting the thing to work right. Too much "eye candy" scares me, it makes me doubt the title's value as a simulation. If that's not the case with SBP, all the better.

I would buy 3 or 4 $125 simulations any day of the week and leave the $65 "games" for someone else. That's still only $500 for hours, hours, and .....hours of entertainment and educational value. I certainly don't need the latest and greatest in Hollywood pyrotechnics to keep my interest either.

Kudos eSIM, you've got my money.

Mylo42

[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.

[Pinetree]

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!

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.

[SubSerpent]

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]

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?! :lol: ), 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]

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?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=6132&sid=6b4749e33e0aaf2cb235fb772c6b991c

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

The specs in my review are a bit dated, it seems :lol:
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.

[SubSerpent]

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]

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! :up: 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]

Is it worth it? I'm about to find out! :up: 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]

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.

[SubSerpent]

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:

[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.


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.

[CCIP]

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. :o

Ok, I can understand the gameplay, but sheesh - not the gunnery!

Man, I have a feeling you're out for a good game rather than a training sim. In which case I think a trio of Battlefield 2, OFP and T-72 will probably make a good bundle at the same price. They're all good games, and will probably be more worth your money, given your preferences. But that is far from true for many others.

[U-49]

This sim/trainer or whatever you call it is not worth the money to me and that's the bottom line.
Yeah great, we've read it over and over from you--ad naseum. You got yourself banned from Ubisoft's SH3 forum for a while, and now you're being a nuisance here.

Please stop trolling already. :zzz:

[SubSerpent]

This sim/trainer or whatever you call it is not worth the money to me and that's the bottom line.
Yeah great, we've read it over and over from you--ad naseum. You got yourself banned from Ubisoft's SH3 forum for a while, and now you're being a nuisance here.

Please stop trolling already. :zzz:


Are people only suppose to agree with you? Does the world revolve around U-49? I think not! Quit being a little BOY and speak your mind. However, this topic was about 'Is it worth the money' and not about how you feel about me. If you'd like to create that topic, Clint Eastwood said it best - Go ahead, make my day ....

[TankHunter]

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.


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.

A. "The troops in the game look like something from a 1980's PC game and haven't really been improved upon since SB1... 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." You do seem to care about graphics.
B. :looking around falling apart house: I would hardly say that I am rich.
C. OPF when it comes to armored warfare is about as true to life as a cartoon. No lead, hit points used rather than RHA values, etc ad nausium.

P.S. Also T-72 isnt exactly a simulator, considering that the speed of HEAT in it is around 300ms or so IIRC. The GPS on tanks is also off as I remember.

[Bluewings]

OFP has much better gameplay and tank gunnery than SBPE

:o :rotfl:

You don 't have a clue do you ! :rotfl:

Cheers .

[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.


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.

A. "The troops in the game look like something from a 1980's PC game and haven't really been improved upon since SB1... 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." You do seem to care about graphics.
B. :looking around falling apart house: I would hardly say that I am rich.
C. OPF when it comes to armored warfare is about as true to life as a cartoon. No lead, hit points used rather than RHA values, etc ad nausium.


In response to A.

- Movement across the ground is not graphics but rather physics and is REALLY important for true to life gunnery dontcha think?

In response to B.

- I'm sorry you waste money on sims like this with a house falling apart around you. Obviously your priorities are a bit mixed up.

In response to C.

- If you think OFP is cartoonish you obviously haven't played it or you seriously need a new graphics card. There is leading the target modeled in that game. Perhaps that is why you dislike the game so much? - Kept shooting behind the enemy or where he was at and kept missing so he got you instead? That's too bad :cry:

[SubSerpent]

OFP has much better gameplay and tank gunnery than SBPE

:o :rotfl:

You don 't have a clue do you ! :rotfl:

Cheers .


No, I'm not into board games. The movie was humorous though.

[Bluewings]

This is NOT the only tank sim out there

As I just said , you don 't have a clue .
There is no other Tank Sim on the market . SB ProPE is the only one .

All other stuff are simply games without any realistic valor whatsoever .
You make me laugh mate !!! :rotfl:

Cheers .

[SubSerpent]

This is NOT the only tank sim out there

As I just said , you don 't have a clue .
There is no other Tank Sim on the market . SB ProPE is the only one .

All other stuff are simply games without any realistic valor whatsoever .
You make me laugh mate !!! :rotfl:

Cheers .


I'm sorry that SB PRoPE is the only one, it's not worth a hat full of crap in my personal opinion. But I am glad that I amuse you! :lol:

[Bluewings]

You know what , go to Tanknet forums http://63.99.108.76/forums/index.php?act=idx
or log on there :
http://www.steelbeasts.com/index.php

And maybe , maybe you 'll understand why real life tankers are training on ProPE and not on OFP .

Cheers .

[TankHunter]

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.


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.

A. "The troops in the game look like something from a 1980's PC game and haven't really been improved upon since SB1... 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." You do seem to care about graphics.
B. :looking around falling apart house: I would hardly say that I am rich.
C. OPF when it comes to armored warfare is about as true to life as a cartoon. No lead, hit points used rather than RHA values, etc ad nausium.


In response to A.

- Movement across the ground is not graphics but rather physics and is REALLY important for true to life gunnery dontcha think?

In response to B.

- I'm sorry you waste money on sims like this with a house falling apart around you. Obviously your priorities are a bit mixed up.

In response to C.

- If you think OFP is cartoonish you obviously haven't played it or you seriously need a new graphics card. There is leading the target modeled in that game. Perhaps that is why you dislike the game so much? - Kept shooting behind the enemy or where he was at and kepy missing so he got you instead? That's too bad :cry:

I am starting to suspect that you are a useless wanker who knows little, if anything about what he is talking about. Obviously you know nothing about fire control systems on modern AFVs or what ammunition can do to said AFVs. It is also starting to become painfully apparent that you really haven’t looked at the sim in question. But, please, don’t get it. The last thing I, or anyone else wants is someone getting it and then complaining about how bad it is because they are looking for a first person shooter rather than a modern armored warfare simulator which is used by more countries than I have fingers on my hand.

Oh, I have OFP. It is a good sim for crunchies, but piss poor when it comes to anything close to armored warfare. No LRF, dynamic or manual lead, being able to nail a tank in the rear with an AT weapon and it lives, shooting at optics with no effect, etc is not close to real life. So in that respect, it is cartoonish. Lets not get into straw man tricks, ok?

[Skybird]

Sub Serpent,

if you do not have the sim, you cannot judge it, because you don't know it. So be a polite guy then and shut up. Else you are running the risk of beeing assumed to talk about things you do not know. Such a person is called a fool, at best.

You also ignore the information input you already got, else you wouldn't continue to concentrate on irrelevant things SBP has nothing to do with. I told you what it is, and why. Live with it, or don't, but stop shooting holes into the air. And now put a damper on your temper, else this thread will be cleaned of your presence.

Second warning I give in this thread, so it's a yellow card. Everyone knows what card comes next.

[Skybird]

If you want a red one, you are really going for it, Serpent, or what? Just some minutes after my last warning...

Don't try me a second time, else your time on the whole board will be extremely limited.