Which wouldyou buy...

[koga]

Which would you buy.SB2 or SB2 P.E If they were to cost the same amout.
I would get sb2 p.e just cause i play sb too much.Please explain why your choice.

[dejawolf]

it's called SB pro PE, not SB2 PE.
and i'd go for pro PE.
it's more realistic and accurate.

[Mace]

Both.

However given that SB Pro is used for training by a variety of defence forces, I think it'd have more attention to detail and thus it's the version I'm really looking forward to.

Mace

[Bluewings]

"T-72 Balkans on fire" ?? :casstet: :lol:

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Skybird03]

I would expect more realistic detail in Pro (at the cost of accessability, maybe, for the casual gamer?), and due to the longer time of developement (and gaming customers beeing aimed at) better graphics, or more graphical details, in SB2. The ratio between realism/complexity and graphics will decided if I need SB2 too, for slowly but surely I am getting tired of waiting and so will buy SB pro this spring, or summer, or autumn, or winter, or next year; I am not planning to wait until SB2 gets released in 2006. Or 2007. Or 2008. Or later. Somehow this thing starts to remind me of Harpoon 4...

[PS-SCUD]

I think that's Ssnake's evil little plan....

He's going to get everyone so tired of waiting that they won't be able to stand it any longer, and they'll break down and buy SB Pro PE before SB2 comes out.

Then when SB2 comes out, everyone will have had SB Pro PE for a while, and will be excited about its features and will buy that as well.

[TopKick]

I don't think we will see PE this year.

[alloy]

It’s not specifically the question you asked koga but if Steel Beasts 2 (SB 2) and Steel Beasts Pro Personal Edition (SB Pro PE) were not only priced comparably but released at the same time I would have a very hard time choosing. Ssnake has said “SB2 is supposed to be more accessible… and if there is a conflict between gameplay/fun and realism that is going to make things complicated, we'll favor the fun aspect of it” (Ssnake).

This concerns me not because I’m a stickler for needless complexity but because I know so little about tanks that when I play a simulation such as SB I have the expectation that I’m learning how it’s really done. I like to think of simulations as documents of practical instruction in a electronic entertainment format. It’s as if by owning a software product I’ve come as close as I might to owning an actual tank. This elusion is spoiled for me if I have knowledge that a given simulation has made compromises.

I want SB 2 for its polish, campaigns, extended support period and any new features that it will have that its predecessors do not. I want SB Pro PE not for its complexity alone but for its realism and authenticity.


Works cited-
Ssnake. “Will you buy SB Pro PE?” 13 Aug. 2004. 2:22 PM
http://www.steelbeasts.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=3227&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=100

[Skybird03]

Pro - next year...? If that is going to happen, then I am finished with SB, too. Amongst all my colleagues and friends I am already the last one with some remaining interest in it. All the others already have moved on and are unlikely to ever come back to SB again - no matter how good or bad it will be. Their interest simply has been starved for perfection. Seeking perfection is a nice thing. But the longer they take, the more potential customers they are loosing. Simply that, sorry. If they release Pro not before next year I say it was a bad idea to ever plan to release a Pro at all.

I hope for late spring or summer. Even my interest does not last eternally. This place saw topics like this already two years ago. :?

[alloy]

edited

[koga]

i guess i need to get the names straight and if i had to guess i would say that PRO P.E would ome out between x-mas of '05 to the summer of '06

[Trekker]

Pro - next year...? If that is going to happen, then I am finished with SB, too. Amongst all my colleagues and friends I am already the last one with some remaining interest in it. All the others already have moved on and are unlikely to ever come back to SB again - no matter how good or bad it will be. Their interest simply has been starved for perfection. Seeking perfection is a nice thing. But the longer they take, the more potential customers they are loosing. Simply that, sorry. If they release Pro not before next year I say it was a bad idea to ever plan to release a Pro at all.

I hope for late spring or summer. Even my interest does not last eternally. This place saw topics like this already two years ago. :?

Amen..

[Lone*star49]

Pro - next year...? If that is going to happen, then I am finished with SB, too. Amongst all my colleagues and friends I am already the last one with some remaining interest in it. All the others already have moved on and are unlikely to ever come back to SB again - no matter how good or bad it will be. Their interest simply has been starved for perfection. Seeking perfection is a nice thing. But the longer they take, the more potential customers they are loosing. Simply that, sorry. If they release Pro not before next year I say it was a bad idea to ever plan to release a Pro at all.

I hope for late spring or summer. Even my interest does not last eternally. This place saw topics like this already two years ago. :?

Amen..
...

:x I got to chime in here too.. No one, besides a few of us Seasoned- Vets :shock: have to worry as much about the time (when) SB Pro PE is released, than us.. As we may not even be around when it does come out .

:) But my bet is, that it will be released within 3-4 months (I hope) and I feel confident that I will be around then, and have many years after that to head to the ultimate battle ground, with and against many that have gone MIA, and even those who say they have deserted, out of perfection, will hear the haunting call of the sounds of SB Pro PE thunder.. and return

:wink: Hang in there, as SB2 was spoken-of thruout the last 2-3 years, not SB Pro PE..

Pro PE is otw, like D-Day, the ships are being fueled, the SB Team is loading up, and it will land soon, and YOUR Liberation is just around the corner.. And you, and your lost SB soul-mates will be reunited once again, and for some time to come..


LS

[dejawolf]

yes, all 3 of us are loading the ships.

[Skybird03]

Your word in my gunbarrel's ear. If summer, or autumn at the latest - okay, I could live with that.

I remember how it was with Harpoon 4, another of these endless stories - some time before it was officially cancelled I simply had stopped reading news about it, or watching the "latest" screenshots. I did not care any longer. If it would have been released, I wouldn't have cared, wouldn't have red reviews, wouldn't have visited the forum at subsim.com - interest simply was gone, and was not to come back again. i even did not noticed that it was cancelled, until I was told, that dead it already was for me.

eSim should regard this fate as a very serious threat, hehehe :D

[Sean]

I fail to see the comparision with harpoon 4. Harpoon 4 was initially started/funded in late 1996/ early 1997. The first developer was doing a bad job, so it was sent to another developer a few years in. From what I understand, they pretty much started all over again. The second developer, crusader studios, ended up going out of business before they could finish the game. Right before it was cancelled, it was sent to one of ubisofts developers in romania. (They specialized in chess games) they had it in beta testing for a few months, and I'm guessing they couldnt figure out how to fix the remaining bugs. As a result, Ubi cancelled the project. H4 was a 7 year project. The last patch for sb1 was 5/1/02. So Pro PE will be in development for 3 years in a couple of weeks here. SB has been developed by the same developer all along, and the source code hasnt been shipped around to different developers, who each would have to take the time to read the code to learn how it works.

So I guess that means esim has 4 more years to go to be just like harpoon 4, right?

Ssnake has mentioned what that there are a few housekeeping things left to do before its completed, and you know he wont give a release date until its almost ready to go out the door.

[Joe]

http://www.steelbeasts.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001292.html

http://www.steelbeasts.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000327.html

...some remarks from way back, when...

[sabot_ready]

I will buy both as I like to spend money!

[TankHunter]

Same here Sabot. I'll get both.

[12Alfa]

Although I'm speaking from the other side i can tell you it's worth the wait no matter if it takes another 3-4 years (and I don't think it will).

I am back for the weekend from a army/airforce valadation 2 week exercise with one of our griffen (helo) sqn's testing the software, and I can tell you that even though I know what it can do I'm still taken back when I see it in action on 20 stations.
My regt is providing the ground action for them to carrie out their helo missions.It was used wedesday for a 2 Inf coy/ helo blocking and extraction mission, simply outstanding, and this from a tanker, heheheh
It is nigh and day compaired to SB1, can't see how anyone could be dissapointed.

Just hangin there troops!

On a 6 hr session not 1 drop, glich, reboot, ect. And this is when non-player such as helo pilots are on the system for the 1st time.

Just relax and have a beer during the wait, or join in on a TGIF mission to pass the time, it can't be that far off now (i don't know when by the way), it's all good.

[smogover]

Hey 12alfa... that sounds like great fun :D

But seriously... as much as I understand that the eSim guys are doing everything they can to get this all perfect & beautiful for the rest of us non-military puppies, I certainly can understand some folks starting to lose patience with what seems like it's continual lack of release. I too find those thoughts flashing through my head occasionally.....

Luckily I am also darn forgetful & so completely forget I've just had those feelings, & play some really cool single player mission on SB1 such as one of the FlashTraffic series :P I still love that little bugger :lol:

[smogover]

Oh... & I will definately be buying Pro PE, & yeah... probably SB2 as well

[mapman]

On a 6 hr session not 1 drop, glich, reboot, ect. And this is when non-player such as helo pilots are on the system for the 1st time.


I have a feeling this may be a standard MP game time length in Pro PE...LOL

[Volcano]

Well you can always "be finished with SB" and then return later when the sequel does come out. I never understood why this "finished with" status seems to reflect that you intend to never buy the sequel.

[Ssnake]

... Ssnake has said “SB2 is supposed to be more accessible… and if there is a conflict between gameplay/fun and realism that is going to make things complicated, we'll favor the fun aspect of it” (Ssnake).

This concerns me not because I’m a stickler for needless complexity but because I know so little about tanks that when I play a simulation such as SB I have the expectation that I’m learning how it’s really done. I like to think of simulations as documents of practical instruction in a electronic entertainment format. It’s as if by owning a software product I’ve come as close as I might to owning an actual tank. This elusion is spoiled for me if I have knowledge that a given simulation has made compromises.

Any simulation is a simplification of real life, so you will always find "compromises", even in SB Pro. Compromises aren't necessarily an evil thing so long as they retain the "essence" of an issue. ("essence" being used in the Aristotelian sense of all properties that required to define something). Simplifications actually are a desirable thing since it helps the user to concentrate on the crucial aspects that a simulation attempts to teach and train.

Software development must pay attention to a number of environmental variables - limitations of the hardware that the customers own, economical restraints (like limited development budgets and the necessity to operate profitably to stay in business), and the desire to capture as much functionality as a measure of fidelity.

For example, it doesn't make much sense to simulate maintenance on a tank (unless it's a training tool for maintenance personnel). Undoubtedly, proper maintenance is an essential prerequisite to keep a complex machine like a tank operational. But what if you discovered in a simulation that track tension was too high or too low - what could you actually do? You don't have a wrench, and you don't have four guys to pull it to get the tension right.
There's a number of similar issues that we must consider as "outside the bubble" of a model.

There are cases where there is no clear answer what the best solution might be. For example, it has been argued that the cal .50 on the M1 can only be power-traversed in azimuth, so the M1 tankers asked to have mouse control only for the side but not the elevation in SB. This has at the same time been the source of a lot of confusion and support requests of people who thought that something was wrong.
Is it really essential to have such a feature?
One could argue that the standard doctrine is to keep the cal .50 pointed straight forward, and that the gunner is then ordered to track the target while the TC works his machine gun. So, in reality, the TC hardly uses the power traverse at all - then why model it, if that confuses most people?


It's questions like these where one could argue both ways where we intend to make the difference between SB2 and SB Pro (plus a number of "fluff" issues like slightly more spectacular effects or more scenarios coming with SB2). Ultimately, only the first serious prototypes of SB2 will show how much of a difference there is between SB2 and SB Pro. It's not like we wanted to create a "Quake on Tracks" with SB2, but I think that complexity in itself is not a virtue, not even for simulations, and especially not for simulation games. I also think that more people should discover the many challenges and exciting things about present day combined arms combat tactics. To achieve this, SB2 is supposed to be more accessible so that it doesn't scare newcomers away because it's so bloody complicated.

On the other hand, "dumbing down" would be a cure worse than the disease. I think that there is a market for intellectually challenging real-time games that do not rely on speedy mouse clicking and fast reflexes. Making SB2 simplistic would eliminate the very virtues that make Steel Beasts such an experience, so we'd be very stupid if we attempted to achieve mass compatibility. It will always be a "minority program", but we should not actively seek to shrink this minority. If simulation games as a whole suffer from a lack of customers, it's because some fan groups and developers have painted themselves into a corner where they have themselves essentially detached from beginners. We need more "Strike Commanders" to popularize flight simulation games, not another realism patch for Falcon 4 (as great a simulation as it certainly is).

[ShermansWar]

Myself, I'm Puzzled. If alloy wants the more realistic game, then why not Buy Pro PE?I thought that was the whole point of having 2 versions.

[alloy]

Any simulation is a simplification of real life, so you will always find "compromises", even in SB Pro.

Steel Beasts is my one and only tank sim. I had no prior knowledge about armor and have little more now beyond what this simulation has inspired me to learn. I have confidence that SB Pro PE will satisfy my desire for “authenticity” and with that satisfaction there is then room in my collection for Steel Beasts 2 in the form I speculatively anticipate it will take.

I think that there is a market for intellectually challenging real-time games.

As long as the militaries of the World need affordable training software, simulation enthusiasts add newcomers to their numbers and eSim Games continues to provide for both these groups there is a place for most in what ever direction their preferences favor.

However, If SB Pro PE and SB 2 were the same in all others ways but their complexity and target audience I don’t know that I would have had much impetus to participate in this thread. Because in years to come I will have both to choose from and not any one tank simulation it’s the comparisons I made in the closing paragraph of my Apr 19, 2005 - 07:50 PM GMT post that most concern me. If we look at the circumstance that the support for one title may end just as the next simulation is complete this alone may sway the consumer into making a purchase they otherwise would have been less inclined to.

Keeping in mind eSim’s few development staff this last issue will be decided by time constraints, I’m sure, and not the desires of the team. It never the less greatly impacts future buying decisions.

[ShermansWar]

Ah, ok, i gotcha.

[koga]

thats long reply there