Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Japo32]

I suppose, we all usually pickup the best of each sim and try to imagine one with all those best stuff. 

When I was making games loooong ago as 3D animator, I loved of course flight sims, and FPS, and wanted to see a sim that could join both together, so you could go down of your plane or helicopter and walk around fighting. All people told me that was imposible, until Operation Flashpoint came.

Then in XPlane I loved severall things but not all, so instead of crying I used my 3DStudio Licence and started building planes for it. Maybe I could do the same in future with tanks? Who knows, but if people stay confortable in one place, then we would never could reach the moon.

 

SteelBeast is great in many aspect. Nobody doubt at it. But some of us would like to see improved some areas. That is the reason of this post, isn't it?

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Japo32

[thewood]

Yes, this is a content wish list, but when a few people keep asking for stuff that really is out of the context of the game...well, its why this is 203 pages long and difficult read.

 

edit...now 204.

 

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by thewood

[Captain_Colossus]

another reason why is that many of the things requested are just a given, like lists of playable vehicles: just assume that everyone wants as all vehicles playable; even if you don't prefer certain vehicles, that would still guarantee that your selected vehicle gets in there. given an infinite amount of time and resources, or a magic wand, that would be the easiest wish to fulfill without thinking about it- unless someone really believes they've found a particular vehicle probably outside most people's awareness for this reason or that, requesting playable playable vehicles is like requesting better graphics. not that i mind it so much, but it does make the list longer when everyone fully is aware already they all want, ideally, all playable vehicles.

 

 

[thewood]

The list has become more "I want SB to become XXX game", and less about possibly guiding the devs to invest in specific things that will make SB a better game for what it is.

[Japo32]

Well.. SB will became a different simulator with each update. Change doesn't mean to become worst if the main point of it is preserved. For me the big issue with SB are graphics. Not only because they are beautiful to see, but as always I say in Xplane, graphics means better simulation also. A better 3D fog, means better simulation. A better rain, the same. A better terrain graphics means I can know where are the mud areas to avoid them. Leave normal map chain tracks or wheel ones, means I can follow the contacts.

But better graphics doesn't mean worst FPS. DX12 gives better performance than DX11 and DX10 and of course DX9. People in DCS World changed from 20fps to 60fps with better graphics. The problem is the compatibility with older versions because military clients don't want better graphics, but preserve their functions. Good. Maybe would be good to separate the profesional from the PE. We do not pay lots of dollars per unit of SB PRO, but we can be thousands if SB reach better graphics and improve for best, preserving always the good it has. Or do people want to continue playing with SB Gold?

 

About people that want to play with soldiers. asuming the rol of Snipers, soldiers, etc. Well right now is not good to manage soldiers as the controls are the same as it where a vehicle. Of course a M4 cannot do too much against a armor vehicle, but it can do something against a commander with his body outside as it was said before. Do that become the sim more like a game? I don't think so. What it brings the sim to a game is the people that comes to play with it. But as always, you can choose who do you want to play with. In ARMA3 there are lots of boys that only want to run and fire yelling around... We have a community that don't allow that and we play our 40-50 people missions realistically. And I have ARMA3 and love it, and I have SB PRO PE full licence and love it.. But that doesn't mean I would like to see things changed for good. 

 

But at the end, the last word always is from eSim Games. So.. this is just a good chat, hehe.

[Gibsonm]

29 minutes ago, Japo32 said:

The problem is the compatibility with older versions because military clients don't want better graphics, but preserve their functions. Good. Maybe would be good to separate the profesional from the PE. We do not pay lots of dollars per unit of SB PRO, but we can be thousands if SB reach better graphics and improve for best, preserving always the good it has.

 

I thinks that's your key issue.

 

From memory eSim gets something like 80%+ of its revenue from the military customers so the Pro PE (commercial) version will always be a sub set of Pro (military), not a separate product.

 

If you separate Pro PE from Pro then I think Pro PE would just die.

 

P.S.: I'd also disagree with the idea that "better graphics means better simulation".

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by Gibsonm
Added the Postcscript

[thewood]

ARMA community is huge compared to SM commercial.  There are a lot of ARMA communities that are professional, and in some cases have a very strong military background.  Look at the SimHQ group.  My suggestion is if you want to play sniper, you are better off playing with someone like that and not wasting your time putting up wish lists for turning SB into ARMA, even though you know its not likely to happen.

Edited April 25, 2017 by thewood

[Apocalypse 31]

11 hours ago, thewood said:

The list has become more "I want SB to become XXX game", and less about possibly guiding the devs to invest in specific things that will make SB a better game for what it is.

 

22 minutes ago, thewood said:

My suggestion is if you want to play sniper, you are better off playing with someone like that and not wasting your time putting up wish lists for turning SB into ARMA

 

There's nothing worse than the few people that police this thread telling others what is/is not allowed in a 'wish list'.  I can only imagine the type of world we'd live in if everyone thought inside the box. 

[Japo32]

Of course I respect you don't think better graphics are not better simulation... but when someone say that to me, because I come from flight sims and I make planes for xplane, I always put them this video:

 

That is train simulator, that has rain over the windshield. As you can see is blured. If you carry that blur to the planes windshield and you cannot clean it because any reason, you have to change from VFR flying (visual) to IFR flying (instrumental). In the default sim, never the windshield si blurred even is pouring seas of rain.

Our view condition modifies the way we use our machines. If I can see mud areas clearly, then I won't carry my tank there. Those visual fx and texture shaders are produced in new dx versions. But even those new DX versions carry better performance because they put all the graphic effort into graphics cards. So you would have more FPS, so you would have more units, more grass, more distance view. At the end a more close to reality world, so better simulation. And I don't say this as a gamer, but as a sim-games-3D graphics developer. I know what I am talking about.

 

I think the focus thermals now we have in 4.x version brings better simulation.... and those comes because we have better graphics in SB4.x than 3.x version.

 

 

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by Japo32

[Grenny]

the thing is 90% of tanking can not be simulated in computer inviroment anyway. F.e. mud, you rarely can tell from the visuals if the mud is go or nogo....you need to dismount an check. 

 

But would never disagree with you that better graphics or added features wouldn't improve the game.  Its a wishlist thread after all. But I also try to consider what priority a change /feature should have and whats the price of it.

[thewood]

Anyone is free to post what they want, within reason driven by the admins.  I am not policing anything.  I don't get paid for that.  I am just telling someone who is posting where they might find what they are looking for.  Instead of posting here and having a long discussion about it, go play a game that already has what he wants.  I thought maybe he didn't know where to find a professional community of ARMA players.  Now he's talking about graphics.  No one here wishes worse graphics, but to go on over several posts about why he thinks its important, is, again, why this thread has become a lot less useful.  I wish I were 6 foot 6 inches tall.  But I am not and won't be.  I wish SB cost $1, and the devs still made money.  But I don't post it.  I have few inhibitions, but do have some.

 

As to people posting wishes about things that I personally don't think fit the scale of SB, I have just as much a right to make my opinion known that the devs shouldn't waste their time on it.  Ultimately, its the devs decision.  I don't want the devs to think that just because someone posts a wish, everyone on the forum agrees with it being a priority.  Kind of an un-wish to counter the wish.

[Grenny]

1 minute ago, thewood said:

Anyone is free to post what they want, within reason driven by the admins.  I am not policing anything.  I don't get paid for that.  I am just telling someone who is posting where they might find what they are looking for.  Instead of posting here and having a long discussion about it, go play a game that already has what he wants.  I thought maybe he didn't know where to find a professional community of ARMA players.  Now he's talking about graphics.  No one here wishes worse graphics, but to go on over several posts about why he thinks its important, is, again, why this thread has become a lot less useful.  I wish I were 6 foot 6 inches tall.  But I am not and won't be.  I wish SB cost $1, and the devs still made money.  But I don't post it.  I have few inhibitions, but do have some.

 

As to people posting wishes about things that I personally don't think fit the scale of SB, I have just as much a right to make my opinion known that the devs shouldn't waste their time on it.  Ultimately, its the devs decision.  I don't want the devs to think that just because someone posts a wish, everyone on the forum agrees with it being a priority.  Kind of an un-wish to counter the wish.

...but you to roll a 12 in willpower to counter a wish?

[thewood]

I have my magic hat on as a modifier

[Zaphod]

1 hour ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

 

 

There's nothing worse than the few people that police this thread telling others what is/is not allowed in a 'wish list'.  I can only imagine the type of world we'd live in if everyone thought inside the box. 

+1

[Marko]

I tend not to take the wish list to seriously i have asked for stuff i know will never materialise

For me its just a bit of fun. but i still think zombies are needed look what they did for Arma.

Better still zombie sheep with fifty cals attached. LoL 

But seriously i wonder if the existence of the wish list plays any part in decision process Esim use when planning additional content in there updates

I like to think it does a lot of the new contend i wished for materialised like the playable BMP T-55 M-60 etc 

Companies tend to plan a couple of years in advance.

Esim seem to work in planned increments slowly but surly improving the Sim with an eye to the limitations of the old engine. 

I know very little about the technical side of how to build a simulation as complex as a armour sim.

But i have often wondered should they just scrap the old engine and buy an existing engine and transfer of all there content over 

No easy task i should imagine. but it would help secure the sims future 

Edited April 25, 2017 by Marko

[Gibsonm]

5 hours ago, Japo32 said:

And I don't say this as a gamer, but as a sim-games-3D graphics developer. I know what I am talking about.

 

Understand your point of view. Especially as "better" graphics means more work and more money for you as a developer/designer.

 

As an Army Officer of 30+ years experience, the last ten or so focused on using Simulation in some form or other for training outcomes, most of which are used to build capability for use on operations - I disagree.

 

Its not always better.

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by Gibsonm

[Japo32]

I agree it is not always better. But in this case I am not searching any money in SteelBeast. Only a better experience. 

[DK-DDAM]

we also need to realise who the main customer base is.. civis or military customers.. and what hardware they are having..

[Grenny]

1 hour ago, Japo32 said:

I agree it is not always better. But in this case I am not searching any money in SteelBeast. Only a better experience. 

But you do realise, can only be an aid to training value.

If the software can only run with 10 units on the map(given the hardware) but has top notch graphics, its training value for company training = zero and therefor also the experience will be shitty.

 

Again, no argue that good looks are great, but their are not in the highest priority.

 

[Ssnake]

6 hours ago, Marko said:

But seriously i wonder if the existence of the wish list plays any part in decision process Esim use when planning additional content in there updates

...

But i have often wondered should they just scrap the old engine and buy an existing engine and transfer of all there content over 

No easy task i should imagine. but it would help secure the sims future 

 

1. Well, if I see things in the wishlist mentioned that we decided to implement, it makes me a happy person, and I sleep better.
2. It is a question that we seriously considered on several occasions. As an ot´ption, it is and will remain on the table. At the same time, like you already suspected, it would be a major task for which a second unit is needed. Developing a new Steel Beasts from scratch will take years, and the customers still want their version to be supported in that time. In fact, most would probably continue to ask for feature additions (which in turn would make the secon unit's job even harder).

[Gibsonm]

2 hours ago, Japo32 said:

I agree it is not always better. But in this case I am not searching any money in SteelBeast. Only a better experience. 

 

Yes but "better" is subjective.

 

If I'm using simulation to train a Cbt Team OC, a BG CO or a BDE staff where its primarily map / icons based - I don't care if I can count raindrops on the screen (quite apart from upgrading the 1000s of machines in our simulation fleet to cope with it). It also doesn't simulate that rain running down the person's neck, etc. (i.e. the impacts on fatigue, etc.)

 

If I'm training a rifleman, then we'll just schedule a range practice in the rain, since doing it indoors and trying to "simulate" cold, wind, rain, etc. and their impacts on shooting accuracy is of questionable value.

 

Sim is used primarily to provide initial training or continuation training. To a point weather, etc. is abstracted so the trainee can focus on the key skills (just like people's first lesson in driving a car is often in a shopping centre car pack, not on a autobahn on a wet day). Alternatively those doing continuation training already have the skills and we use simulation to retain currency or fine tune skills.

 

In the rifleman example, I can say the person will gain a partial qualification in simulation with the need for a confirmatory practice with live ammunition under varying weather conditions.

[TSe419E]

The Personal Edition is limited to selecting map sizes of 22 x 22 km², or 484 km², or less.  It would be nice if 22 km were not a hard and fast rule for the length of the map boundaries.  For example, say the x-axis is 16 km long and the y-axis is 30 km long.  This gives a map that still falls within the 484 km² maximum of the 22 km x 22 km map and gives slightly more flexibility to scenario makers who do not have access to the classroom edition.

[Japo32]

You are right, and I am right. All depends in the point of view you just see it. 

You see it as a proffesional in the army. You want or wanted, or will want this simulator to TRAIN, to make you better in the decisions you have to take in the battlefield to save lifes. So of course you don't care about graphics. And you are right.

 

And I won't ever jump into a tank. I see this as an understanding how things are done, that hate real guns (but consider them necesary as we humans are), but loves simulations, history, etc. My aproximation is more to the joy of learning how things are done there. To choose a life that I will never be, because I will never be a pilot in an F16, or just a train driver. But I love to understand how things are done. For that purpose I choose the eSim GAMES company, because Games is in his brand name. And I lived the start of games in computers as many others did here. My licence is more near of a game than a real sim, even this sim is just the same sim that is used in the different army to train. But as I will never will jump into a real tank, I just want to simulate how it would be killing polygons.

 

I think that this forum is dedicated to the Personal Edition, so more near to a user that want to train himself in his job (army) and a user like me, that just want to have fun learning and having good experience. I think both of us has the same right in our opinion, and is totally clear that eSim Games won't make a change of a new engine; something they could do while they continue support for this one, and that I consider a mistake. In 5 years maybe computers won't be compatible with this ones, and they will be forced to change, because technology changes. Changing little by little is always a win, and believe me, better graphics these nowadays means better performance... and of course they don't have to loose their soul and be the same core simulator.

Edited April 25, 2017 by Japo32

[Japo32]

Now I am playing with the Pizarro. It would be nice if in future updates we, the trackir users, could have total freedom of all axis. Right now we have a lot, but we cannot move the head forward or backwards (it makes zoom with that movement) and we cannot move the head from side to side, that is interesting in the pizarro because the middle panel.

[Los]

Well while you guys are busy trying to cancel out each others wishes....

 

Chalk me up as someone who'd like to see some of the GM tools that seem to be available on the military side ported over to the civilian side. Since that's a lot of what I am doing with our group.

 

Los

Edited April 26, 2017 by Los