Welcome to Steelbeasts.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Stevo

screenshots 3.0

948 posts in this topic
Here is hope that the bitmap explosions and bitmap fires and bitmap smoke columns will be a thing of the past. While I could for another couple of years have lived very well with the old gfx engine regarding sky, terrain, vegetation and vehicles, these special effects were something that to me looked always inadequate, especially the burning tanks with their tiny little fires and their pedantically small trails of smoke. Hope it is possible now to add something more adequate in display, done either by the house team, or modders.

I agree they look increasingly out of place with graphical improvements taking big leaps elsewhere. Fingers crossed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree they look increasingly out of place with graphical improvements taking big leaps elsewhere. Fingers crossed.

I could live with all above mentioned (gun shooting or hit flashes, fires, etc.. can stay as bit maps)if only smoke from wrecks is " a bit" more denser and higher, and 3D of course - most of us knows how dense and thick is smoke from burning rubber is.

That kind of smoke would help with 1 more thing drastically -determining wind speed& direction and where to drop smoke screen for example. Or making combat in area where are already some burning wrecks a big issue - even for vehicles with thermal sight devices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why make a engine grafics update and not invest more time in other more appealing features?

Maybe its a resource thing.

We only have X staff so lets get the graphics engine update out the door now and subsequently update the things that use it.

Its not like they have a staff of a thousand and can run numerous tasks concurrently.

and of course “appealing” to who.

What is appealing to you, others might find a waste of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

i agree that i had higher expectations for graphics,but i guess we will have to wait for the release and see for our self how

immersive the game has become,if its still dissapointing then,you might consider the russian counterpart of steelbeasts made by logos sims:)

I just want to let you know that their sim looks better than our CCTT. Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes! I was just remarking to my girlfriend that, perhaps it's a good thing that SB's graphics don't have all the 'eye candy' of other games. And that more attention is given to the physics and vehicle systems.

Reason being: I think this discourages the hordes of trolls that one inevitably encounters playing most any online "shoot-'em-up" game. ...Well, that and the price.:debile2:

You know the sort...those who just show up to blow up anything and everything, generally cause chaos and annoy everyone else? I think the eSim model results in a community that is distilled down to hardcore tank enthusiasts who are interested in as realistic a simulation of tactical combat scenarios as is feasible. With genuine co-operation toward a shared goal.

Having said all that, my presence here refutes some of what I said. :biggrin:

That is the worst logic ever.

'hey guys, lets make a crap looking game so we don't get more customers!'

$ SB = 2 x Call of Duty games @ $60/game. There have been 7 games. So each Call of Duty kiddo has spent $420 (not including DLC content) on their games. That's much more than we've spent on SB.

Besides, SB isn't the type of game where some kiddie can just join your server and start wrecking house. I certainly do not fear them trying to outgun me or outmaneuver me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$ SB = 2 x Call of Duty games @ $60/game. There have been 7 games. So each Call of Duty kiddo has spent $420 (not including DLC content) on their games. That's much more than we've spent on SB.

I don't know about you guys but, SB helped me to save money as well...

... by not buying BF's like craps! :biggrin:

Since I play SB I'm more interested in real simulators and not just video games with a label : "this is war".

But most of all it helped me to remember the true nature of computer games : "Back in my days, video games were all about game than the video."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to let you know that their sim looks better than our CCTT. Just saying.

sounds like the us army could use an update too then..:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe its a resource thing.

We only have X staff so lets get the graphics engine update out the door now and subsequently update the things that use it.

Its not like they have a staff of a thousand and can run numerous tasks concurrently.

Couple of things come to mind here...

"Rome was not built in a day"

and...

"One step at a time"

and of course “appealing” to who.

What is appealing to you, others might find a waste of time.

Exactly. To add to this:

Many people have placed shadows high on their priority list, others have different priorities to what they feel is "essential", like better smoke/fire, or better dust, or 3D missiles, or better tracers, or a sun in the sky, or light sources, or moving suspension, or tracks on the ground, or better explosions, or 3D crew members, or non-jagged roads, or, or, or. But really, we can all assume that all of these things are desired as eventual goals --of course they are, and they are well known. The difference now is that it is finally becoming possible to do all this nice visual stuff. But what it comes down to what each of you expect and the fact that each person expects something different, be they on the development team (we play SB too!), or a military or civilian customer. So please respect other people's views and respect all the hard work being done on the update (rather than degenerating this into the inevitable pissing match of "here is what I expect"). Everyone has expectations, and work has to be prioritized around what everyone wants, and what is possible according to time. In the end, you decide if it meets your expectations when you decide whether or not to buy the update, that is implied.

That said, the "important thing" to keep in mind though is that the graphics engine IS being updated, and it will continue to be updated into the future. Everyone, on the inside and outside wants to have their cake and eat it too, but the key here is progress, and "3.0" means that we will finally start seeing gradual visual improvements. Will you get everything you want in the update? Well, that all depends on each person, but if 3.0 was the embodiment of what everyone wants (delayed until that is achieved for example), then we would never have it --so someone will be disappointed. ;)

Edited by Volcano
clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'hey guys, lets make a crap looking game so we don't get more customers!'

That is not at all what I wrote.

What I did write was that eSim has given more attention to physics/systems models than the latest graphics.

Besides, it has been stated numerous times on this forum that the personal version is not where eSim makes [most of] its money.

As for cost, you may have a point there. That is, if all of those people bought every version and add-on of game "X". However, having multiple SB licenses to upgrade certainly adds to the cost, as well. (What's the max on one CM stick...7?) So I think it's a bit more variable from person to person. I don't think the average gamer would shell out top dollar for a game that doesn't have all the latest bells and whistles.

SB isn't the type of game where some kiddie can just join your server and start wrecking house.

Exactly my point. I think the way that eSim has modeled the game is prohibitive of troll-type behavior. That's one reason I like this community so much. It's [mostly] made up of people who know how to act like adults.

As a final note I'd like to say: Anything posted by me on these forums should be taken with a rather large grain of salt. :biggrin:

Edited by Lt DeFault
Add'l thoughts. (New text in grey.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 100$ license was easier to swallow when I remembered I spent at least 2 times that on MMO subscription fees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SB Pro PE has been well worth the investment.

Was going to say more but that is what it boils down to, I am really looking forward to the next instalment of ProPE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree that i had higher expectations for graphics,but i guess we will have to wait for the release and see for our self how

immersive the game has become,if its still dissapointing then,you might consider the russian counterpart of steelbeasts made by logos sims:)

Based on the videos, i don't see it better than steel beast . Besides, you can not buy the logos tanksim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is / will there be support for Bump and/or normal mapping in the new gfx engine???

That will make a huuuuuuge difference.

Parallax mapping :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I began playing SB Pro PE eight months ago after playing SB Gold first. I go way back with wargames; Avalon Hill's paper boardgame Squad Leader in the late 70's which entailed having a human opponent, which was difficult to arrange (I even coerced my wife into playing Squad Leader with me). Then I began playing computer games in the late 80's; stragegy games, wargames, and simulators. Now I had a ready opponent to play with at any time but I was never completely satisfied with any of them. The computer opponent in these games is basically an idiot and the computer compensates for its lack of tactical/strategic ability with either a radical increase in troops and/or the "zerg" rush. The only computer games that are a challenge are the Chess computer programs but they have only a 64 square battlefield and five types of units to deal with while we have in SB, a 20 kilometer square battlefield with all kinds of terrain and dozens of types of units. I would think that it would require an array of super-velociraptor Cray computers with a huge amount of programming for the computer opponent to make rational decisions. In the 90's, I began playing Microprose's M1 Tank Platoon, which was similar to SB, but very basic in graphics. But I have learned that graphics are irrelevant if gameplay is poor. SB is still way ahead of what is needed in the graphical department and the gameplay is superb with the multi-player community we have. I play the solitaire SB scenarios but they do not even come close to the multi-gaming experience of the TGIF's, even though I enjoy them immensely. For me, they provide excellent training for the TGIF's. I have played in nearly all of the TGIF's since I started and I have found them to be exhilarating even if I manage to lose all of my units in the first 15 minutes. There is nothing like playing against human opponents. I am not talking about the "trolls" Lt. Default mentioned or the "gunslingers" I remember playing against in Quake a long time ago. I was killed instantly by these gunslingers who did not care about the "game" but only the kills they could rack up. Here, in SB, we have a community that desires to simulate the modern battlefield with all of the nuances it entails. I am very appreciative of the game eSim has made for us and community of players that make it up.

Connaugh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing Connaugh. I agree that SB's dedication to realism is what makes it so appealing, but I am thrilled it is continually upgraded, especially graphically.

I'm quite tempted to join a VU and play in a multiplayer environment but I think there's still much for me to learn before I feel competent enough to do so. More importantly is time; with school, a toddler, a newborn, a mother-in-law, and wifey around, I'm opt to concentrate whatever free time with them. I am, however, able to fire up a quick off-line game from time to time and I've been tinkering with the mission editor which I hope I will be proficient enough to create really good scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought M1 Tank Platoon for the PC, even before I had bought my 1st PC! Pretty sure I still have it packed away somewhere.

I'm ecstatic that eSim sells to us, the public, what is a desktop military trainer.

Unlike flight sims, which most likely garner more funds from their branch of the military, and as such have more resources to develop their sims into something more flashy and graphically appealing, I think eSim have done wonders in creating a solid simulation, like no others.

What with their update of the graphics engine, I'm sure as time and funds are available, they will continue to refine and update the graphics. They've done so in the past.

My point is, the graphic engine work is started. That's the foundation for them to add on to it and tweak it, and add graphics features down the road!

Awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping the new graphics engine would be comparable to this ArmA (Armed Assault) video. The game came out in 2006

EIytpgdfsgU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe you should compare the graphics from M1 Tank platoon with those from steelbeasts,will make you you feel better:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping the new graphics engine would be comparable to this ArmA (Armed Assault) video. The game came out in 2006

Well we still have not seen any videos of what were getting in the update yet.

Graphics do make a difference in the whole overall immersion of a Sim.

But so does the accurate modelling of things like amour thickness.

Realistic sounds etc. Personally i could live with SB graphics the way the are.

And i am happy with the playable vehicles we have.

Oh, i used the play the Amiga version of the original M1 it was truly a classic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping the new graphics engine would be comparable to this ArmA (Armed Assault) video. The game came out in 2006

Well we still have not seen any videos of what were getting in the update yet.

Graphics do make a difference in the whole overall immersion of a Sim.

But so does the accurate modelling of things like amour thickness.

Realistic sounds etc. Personally i could live with SB graphics the way the are.

I would not expect dramatic revolutions in the visual appearance. Judging by the ten screenies that we have so far, the colour palette pretty much looks the same (very good! I liked it since always, for its natural looks), and by the few impressions of trees, even if they are blurred by the sun, natural objects like them seems to be in principle the same. I hope, as I have said, that some special effects, namely burning tanks and smoke rising from them, got improved, but my understanding is that the new graphics engine is not meant to drastically alter the looks of the game right now, but to prepare the stage in case they want to change, add or improve stuff in the visuals at a future time. And we get shadows from vehicles. Whether that means from trees as well, the screenies so far do not show.

Edited by Skybird03

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now