Jump to content
Galileo

Gunner HEAT PC

Recommended Posts

 

My take on it. At the moment, using lead on the M1A2 is one of the most frustrating experiences in gaming that I have had in recent memory. It has promise, but the FSC needs some major overhauls from what was presented in this version. Yes, there are updates, but I'm not going to pledge spending $3 a month to get the latest build. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

yeah, i don't see how this can even be close to realistic with the current control scheme. it's like trying to work the challenger 1's FCS, but it's an M1A2..

like most other sims before it, they seem to stumble on the old block of focusing on driving mechanics first, gunnery mechanics second. 

but well, it's still early days, maybe they'll fix it up properly, and it'll become a viable competitor to SB pro PE on the civvie market. 

Edited by dejawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is only a pre-alpha. It´s not even fair to judge it yet and only builds bad rep before it even has a chance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Red2112 said:

This is only a pre-alpha. It´s not even fair to judge it yet and only builds bad rep before it even has a chance...

It is constructive critiscism. If they aren't able to take that, this project is dead in the water. 

Edited by dejawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Red2112 said:

This is only a pre-alpha. It´s not even fair to judge it yet and only builds bad rep before it even has a chance...

That is like saying that identifying bugs in Steel Beasts is giving it a bad rap... 

 

Publishing a build, pre-alpha or not, invites commentary. I would like to see this project succeed. Publishing a video where I purposely censor my criticisms is doing a disservice to the development process. I stand by my assessment: promising, but it needs some work. In the state of their freely published version, fire and maneuver is not possible to the extent that it should be with the M1A2 SEP. 

Edited by Mirzayev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/4/2020 at 6:21 PM, Gibsonm said:

Cheers.

 

I've stopped tracking the product.

For fuck sake,Last weeks SB session saw AI failure,laser failure,damage model failure...this weeks session towards the end was a fucking slide show... and all after over 20 years of development...this game (GHPC) is what? a year old? (probably not even) in its alpha phase and not even near its completion of said  phase...yet it promises to be a hell of alot in terms of whats desired by armor enthusiasts...and free. I think it definitely deserves a break at this stage.

Edited by Badger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2020 at 10:09 PM, Mirzayev said:

That is like saying that identifying bugs in Steel Beasts is giving it a bad rap... 

 

Publishing a build, pre-alpha or not, invites commentary. I would like to see this project succeed. Publishing a video where I purposely censor my criticisms is doing a disservice to the development process. I stand by my assessment: promising, but it needs some work. In the state of their freely published version, fire and maneuver is not possible to the extent that it should be with the M1A2 SEP. 

Agreed... the more we point out to them the better it will be for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have low expectations for the game, and I don't think GHPC is trying to be anything outstanding.

 

I think they're shooting to be a simple game that uses the Unity engine; something that players can jump in and out of quickly.

 

But I will say this - the developer reaction to Mirzayev's video has been very good. He acknowledged the areas that need improvement, and are asking for more feedback. So, nice to see a positive impact being made with well received feedback from the developer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don´t think the developer was/is unaware of many of the issues pointed out. Even more, he has mentioned SB plenty of times so me thinks he plays/owns a copy of SB Pro PE to start with. They do have a discord channel were IMHO is a "better" place to give direct feedback.  Mainly so people don´t get the wrong impression as we don´t all think alike to start with.  Oh and as a developer, you better receive any feedback well nowdays or you´re doomed to fail.  There´s just to much speculation on everything nowdays.

 

I see alot of bad reviews on products that just launched, when said products (as most) needed a real live test run. Those reviews end up putting initial buyers off, then when some of those initial bugs are ironed out, those initial buyers are lost for good in most cases due to the amount of games coming out and getting more attention in this over saturated game market we live in.  Same goes with many things, like gear, some buy a backpack and swear it´s a great backpack right out of the box/bag!  Dude, carry it on you´re back for a seven day hike with all you need, and do it often, for like a year, then come back and do a review if you like. Just an example of many reviews I see.  Same goes with games, wait till it´s ironed out and optimized to some point, play it for some time, then decide if it´s good or not to you, which dosen´t mean it will be for the rest of the players.

 

The good, the bad and the ugly about social media killing it´s self...

 

But still, as I stated before, this is a PRE-ALPHA.

 

Just me practising my Stoicisim 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it, commercial considerations aside, the only justification for releasing an Alpha version of a software is to invite feedback from the targeted customer demographic. If a developer can't handle constructive criticism, they shouldn't release early. As long as the criticism is respectful and focuses on what the products attempts to be, it is almost always helpful for a developer. Of course, "feedback" from the the proverbial internet basement nerd with the impulse control of a 14 year-old is best ignored, possibly even silenced because really nothing good will ever come from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think it worth mentioning the Dev's response to the criticism:

 

 

ActionScripter1 day ago

Thanks for checking out the public demo for GHPC! Great video. Your feedback is very thorough and, I should say up front, completely fair and correct. The sudden spread of my early demo caught it at kind of an awkward time - I decided it needed to be redone to a higher standard, but that redone version isn't ready yet. To that end, I have a small team now (most notably on visuals and audio) and we are rebuilding just about every piece of the demo. Things from the video that we've fixed in the updated build of GHPC so far: - Stabilization. The new stabilizers support several real-world "modes", including basic "direction" stabilization, angle-based Delta-D (e.g. T-72A), and full point tracking (e.g. Abrams). There are still a few bugs in the new version and the lead isn't implemented completely yet, but I absolutely want to nail it this time, and I've been taking feedback from a bunch of 19 kilos to make sure that happens. Still, at least now when you lase a spot and drive around, the aim stays glued to that spot. - Gun sights. The public demo used a couple of really simple methods of displaying gunnery reticles, and it did not lend itself well to realistic or complex systems. (I'm still pretty proud of that GAS though; the stadia reticle and ballistic markings are accurate via live calculation, not pre-drawn!) In the new build, we have full fidelity in the gun sights we've completed so far, which includes the T-72A, the M60A3 TTS, the T-55A, and the BRDM-2. This attention to detail will continue as the new standard for the other vehicles we add; there should never again be a "fudged" gun sight like the T-72M sight in the public build. - Thermals. You noted, correctly, that the black hot mode in the public demo was screwed up. I made a change to the rendering shortly before I stopped updating that build, which improved a lot of things but completely unbalanced the inverted thermal mode. This will no longer be an issue in the new build. We've been working on thermal rendering itself, beyond simple contrast and tone balance, and we now support things like separate heat sources on vehicles, temperature change over time (and reacting to things like guns firing), and better depiction of the ambient temperature of vegetation and atmospheric haze. This stuff is actually not in the Patreon build yet, unlike the rest, because we're still polishing it - but we've teased it in our Discord server. - Tracks and suspension. Our driving system has had a complete overhaul and now features animation, suspension forces, moving wheels and tracks, gear shifting, and dynamic exhaust smoke, among other things. There are still some rough edges to smooth out, but it's a lot closer to what you'd expect a tank to look and feel like in motion. Things from the video that we're aware of and working on still: everything! I'm not even joking, we have a to-do list a mile long and you mentioned a lot of stuff from it. With how people have responded to my early demo, I and the rest of the team are extremely serious about making sure we get the details right in the new version of GHPC. If you're interested in giving us feedback as we complete and show new features, consider joining the GHPC Discord server! If you message me there and let me know who you are, I'll get you set up with the proper roles and get you in the loop for Abrams and Bradley stuff especially.

 

This type of response in my eyes is paramount to its potential customer base...I have lots of confidence in this team even in its infancy. I will be VERY surprised if they fail.

 
Edited by Badger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Badger said:

For fuck sake,Last weeks SB session saw AI failure,laser failure,damage model failure...this weeks session towards the end was a fucking slide show... and all after over 20 years of development...this game (GHPC) is what? a year old? (probably not even) in its alpha phase and not even near its completion of said  phase...yet it promises to be a hell of alot in terms of whats desired by armor enthusiasts...and free. I think it definitely deserves a break at this stage.

 

No idea what "Last week's SB session" was (TGIF, Kanium, certainly not BG ANZAC) so I can't comment on what you experienced.

 

Nothing is "free".

 

You'll either be paying for; a subscription, DLC, "paying to win" (or whatever these people want to call it), or it will be full of adds from people who are paying so you can play for free.

 

By all means follow it, throw money at it to get the latest version (so much for "free" ;) ) but I'm not interested and wont be.

 

Just because my opinion differs from yours, you don't need to go on a crusade to convert me.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the devs last Q and A video (posted here somewhere), he did state that he wanted to bring up the actual demo (old one) to the new vertical slice standards which again would also be free for everyone. Maybe that would have been a better option for a showcase/review video, along with actual feedback on there Discord channel.  Iam sure the new, up to date demo would give a better impresion to those who are not so educated in how a tank works, which could be 70% of the future consumers of such a sim/product.

 

As to why they released a public pre-alpha, who knows really but them 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks for the responses. 

 

My motivation to provide feedback was after seeing way too many videos using the exact same build that I had, praising GHPC as being the "Best Tank Simulator" (it isn't even released!) and "Steel Beasts but Free" (neither statement is true), with lots of these claims made by people with very little to no experience ("Called Gunner HEAT PC, I imagine PC because it's on a PC!" - Actual quote). 

 

I don't think that GHPC will get to, or is trying, to get to the same level of realism and immersion as Steel Beasts Pro PE, at least not as an initial launch goal. My understanding is that the idea is to make a commercial game that has a higher level of realism than free-to-play options, such as World of Tanks, War Thunder, etc. I'd imagine more along the lines of what I would call "arcade realism," which I would equate to most Novalogic products around the 2000 timeframe (such as Commanche 4, Armored Fist 3, etc). @dejawolf mentioned in another thread that it took him around 600 hours to model the interior of the T-72 in Steel Beasts, which is a significant investment in time and resources. I can see the rationale of only modeling the Gunner and Commander's sights if your focus is on "fun" above everything else. 

 

ActionScripter has an outstanding community presence, and he is passionate and cares about his product. In addition, he has the rare (for the internet) trait of not taking constructive criticism as a personal attack. That is something that is definitely good to see. 

Edited by Mirzayev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Red2112 said:

I really don´t think the developer was/is unaware of many of the issues pointed out. Even more, he has mentioned SB plenty of times so me thinks he plays/owns a copy of SB Pro PE to start with. They do have a discord channel were IMHO is a "better" place to give direct feedback.  Mainly so people don´t get the wrong impression as we don´t all think alike to start with.  Oh and as a developer, you better receive any feedback well nowdays or you´re doomed to fail.  There´s just to much speculation on everything nowdays.

 

 

 

Just me practising my Stoicisim 😁

He dossent own one i talked to him on their discord

MD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone in the comments says, "It looks like Wall-E". 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...